Six Flags Great Adventure (SFGAdv) Discussion Thread

[DirkFunk]

Their rationale is garbage (also I doubt that it is even accurate) and there's a reason no one else in the industry intends to seek to replicating it. And when you buy advertising time or space to promote a new ride in a timeframe in which you know full well there is no chance for it to be running, you are in a real sense promoting something that isn't going to operate in that time frame. They know that, and the purposely vague language is indicative of their general contempt for customers.

 

Take it up with park management then, despite what we say they don't care what enthusiast think for the most part. 95% of people on here disagree with what Six Flags does a majority of the time. But will Six Flags change their ways? No. The general public doesn't care or notice when rides should/shouldn't open.

 

You don't think the general public notices? Six Flags went bankrupt in recent memory, shed most of its parks and ended up permanently closing two (nearly a third) either attempting to delay the inevitable or in the immediate wake of filing Chapter 11. They've presently returned to their prior strategy of giving away season passes to try and increase per cap spending but refined that previous failed strategy by matching it with a "don't spend much" approach based around ride rotation, flat ride construction, mass purchases, and heavily promoted ride rehabs. So yeah, I'm not terribly concerned about taking it up with management. I'm sure plenty have and will.

[jynx242]

"Six Flags president John Fitzgerald previously said that putting the panels in the theme park's parking lot would be too close to the public and would put visitors at risk of injury or the equipment in danger of being damaged."

 

This is such a hot streaming line of bullsh!t I can't even stand it. I want to hear EXACTLY how he thinks kids are going to hurt a bunch of solar panels.

 

Although I agree that this is crap - I'll play devil's advocate here - people DO suck. If there is a way to climb, break, fall off of, or damage something - they will find it.

[DirkFunk]

It says something then about Six Flags that it thinks its customer base is so dumb that they'll manage to fry themselves climbing up onto photovoltaic cells.

[michaellynn4]

The "too close to the public" argument is not the argument they should be leading with. If the primary argument is about the added expenditure of a "parking lot" system putting the designated budget past realistic levels, then they'd be more credible in my eye. It's accepted that solar-covered parking lots are by far the most expensive type of solar system to build, and most past projects are nowhere near the size of the park's parking lot.

 

Unfortunately, preliminary research (aka a few quick Google searches) couldn't come up with any hard figures. Multiple sources continue to talk about how the costs associated with parking lot panel systems are the main thing preventing them from becoming more common, though.

 

It says something then about Six Flags that it thinks its customer base is so dumb that they'll manage to fry themselves climbing up onto photovoltaic cells.

 

Having worked within or right outside the park for over a decade, not to mention having grown up within walking distance from the park, I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that generally speaking, the park's customer base are pretty much morons. Stone cold idiots. I've got more stories than can fill up a NYTimes bestseller, and all it takes is one of those morons to mess up something and create pretty expensive repairs.

[p-sychiatrist]

Six Flags president John Fitzgerald previously said that putting the panels in the theme park's parking lot would put the equipment in danger of being damaged.

 

Just saying, this is the only legitimate reason. But to be fair there are plenty of stupid/really drunk people at Rutgers every weekend and the solar panels in Livingston campus' parking lot haven't been damaged yet. I think it's definitely much better placement considering that clearing a forest area to be eco friendly makes no sense.

 

Also, going back to the earlier topic, Great Adventure's attendance has been rising every year since 2010. Also they mostly went bankrupt due to adding too many coasters and expansions in too short a time frame. Remember that time Kingda Ka and El Toro (which each included expansions and new themed sections of the park) were added back to back years? Consider that the recession also occured and that the coaster wars are essentially over and thay even RMC's are much smaller financial investments than Intamin or even B&M coasters. Six Flags' previous bankrupcy and current attendance is not affected by them opening rides in the beginning of the summer season. There's also budgeting and staffing issues during the spring that would make them weary of opening a ride in the spring when attendance is already significantly lower by default. I know enthusiasts may not like the policy, but it actually is a great way to get guests to come back later that year. Not everybody follows coaster news or hears about a new ride until they're at the park themselves so it makes season passes more enticing. Sorry if this post comes off as super condesecending, I wasn't going for that tone at all but now I don't feel like re-editing it haha

[larrygator]

It's all just a marketing campaign. Of course the ride could open with the park, but that isn't best for business. They'd rather you visit the park early, see the new attraction being installed and buy a season pass to go back when it's finished. I think the last new addition to open with the park was Nitro. That was 15 years ago.

 

That is terrible rationale. Promoting a new ride that you know isn't going to be running is always, always a bad idea. Six Flags does it because they're are notoriously cheap.

 

How is it being cheap? It very well could cost them the same amount to build either way. It might even cost them more to wait longer depending on the demands of the contractors.

Edited February 3, 2016 by larrygator

[DirkFunk]

Also, going back to the earlier topic, Great Adventure's attendance has been rising every year since 2010. Also they mostly went bankrupt due to adding too many coasters and expansions in too short a time frame.

 

Since we're in a mode of writing things that sound condescending: Your understanding of the situation could best be characterized as weak, perhaps even outright incorrect. Obviously they spent more money than revenue was brought in. That's indisputable. But all companies, ALL COMPANIES, generally carry some sort of debt. Most individuals do as well. The issue wasn't merely that they spent borrowed money. The issue was that they weren't able to sustain any measure of growth from the significant increase of attendance those expansions brought about because they sucked at running amusement parks.

 

Six Flags' previous bankrupcy and current attendance is not affected by them opening rides in the beginning of the summer season. There's also budgeting and staffing issues during the spring that would make them weary of opening a ride in the spring when attendance is already significantly lower by default. I know enthusiasts may not like the policy, but it actually is a great way to get guests to come back later that year. Not everybody follows coaster news or hears about a new ride until they're at the park themselves so it makes season passes more enticing. Sorry if this post comes off as super condesecending, I wasn't going for that tone at all but now I don't feel like re-editing it haha

 

If it is a smart policy with definite potential for bringing guests back in, then why isn't Cedar Fair (who's financials in the Ouimet era speak for themselves) copying it? Or SeaWorld? Or Herschend?

[DirkFunk]

It's all just a marketing campaign. Of course the ride could open with the park, but that isn't best for business. They'd rather you visit the park early, see the new attraction being installed and buy a season pass to go back when it's finished. I think the last new addition to open with the park was Nitro. That was 15 years ago.

 

That is terrible rationale. Promoting a new ride that you know isn't going to be running is always, always a bad idea. Six Flags does it because they're are notoriously cheap.

 

How is it being cheap? It very well could cost them the same amount to build either way. It might even cost them more to wait longer depending on the demands of the contractors.

 

My assumption is that they pick up cheap employment from laborers laid off when winter arrives. That would explain the late starts in a lot of northern markets.

[larrygator]

It's all just a marketing campaign. Of course the ride could open with the park, but that isn't best for business. They'd rather you visit the park early, see the new attraction being installed and buy a season pass to go back when it's finished. I think the last new addition to open with the park was Nitro. That was 15 years ago.

 

That is terrible rationale. Promoting a new ride that you know isn't going to be running is always, always a bad idea. Six Flags does it because they're are notoriously cheap.

 

How is it being cheap? It very well could cost them the same amount to build either way. It might even cost them more to wait longer depending on the demands of the contractors.

 

My assumption is that they pick up cheap employment from laborers laid off when winter arrives. That would explain the late starts in a lot of northern markets.

 

OK, I understand your point now.

 

But since the construction is contracted out work with a bid process, the contractors are the ones that would be saving money if they hire cheap labor.

[DirkFunk]

It's all just a marketing campaign. Of course the ride could open with the park, but that isn't best for business. They'd rather you visit the park early, see the new attraction being installed and buy a season pass to go back when it's finished. I think the last new addition to open with the park was Nitro. That was 15 years ago.

 

That is terrible rationale. Promoting a new ride that you know isn't going to be running is always, always a bad idea. Six Flags does it because they're are notoriously cheap.

 

How is it being cheap? It very well could cost them the same amount to build either way. It might even cost them more to wait longer depending on the demands of the contractors.

 

My assumption is that they pick up cheap employment from laborers laid off when winter arrives. That would explain the late starts in a lot of northern markets.

 

OK, I understand your point now.

 

But since the construction is contracted out work with a bid process, the contractors are the ones that would be saving money if they hire cheap labor.

 

If I'm bidding on construction and I think I can use winter layoffs to my advantage, I can put in a bid for the work at a lower amount than my competition with the caveat that I start later. If that bid is going to anyone but Six Flags in this industry, chances are I'm not winning it because they're concerned with selling a quality product at a quality price. If that bid goes to Six Flags, they're not in that business. They've been selling a product of questionable and sometimes miserable quality for the same exact price for roughly 20 years (no lie, just compared season pass prices at SFGAdv and they're lower now than in '99 for top tier, SFA is only $2 more) to a stagnant/shrinking consumer base. They're gonna take low bidder and not care when the work gets done.

[Jcoaster]

Their rationale is garbage (also I doubt that it is even accurate) and there's a reason no one else in the industry intends to seek to replicating it. And when you buy advertising time or space to promote a new ride in a timeframe in which you know full well there is no chance for it to be running, you are in a real sense promoting something that isn't going to operate in that time frame. They know that, and the purposely vague language is indicative of their general contempt for customers.

 

Take it up with park management then, despite what we say they don't care what enthusiast think for the most part. 95% of people on here disagree with what Six Flags does a majority of the time. But will Six Flags change their ways? No. The general public doesn't care or notice when rides should/shouldn't open.

 

You don't think the general public notices? Six Flags went bankrupt in recent memory, shed most of its parks and ended up permanently closing two (nearly a third) either attempting to delay the inevitable or in the immediate wake of filing Chapter 11. They've presently returned to their prior strategy of giving away season passes to try and increase per cap spending but refined that previous failed strategy by matching it with a "don't spend much" approach based around ride rotation, flat ride construction, mass purchases, and heavily promoted ride rehabs. So yeah, I'm not terribly concerned about taking it up with management. I'm sure plenty have and will.

 

Exactly my point. How many people you think actually knew Six Flags went bankrupt? I'll wager that a large amount of the GP doesn't know that. They don't pay attention to that, most people I know who are GP don't even know there is a Six Flags outside of Great Adventure and Magic Mountain.

[DirkFunk]

Exactly my point. How many people you think actually knew Six Flags went bankrupt? I'll wager that a large amount of the GP doesn't know that.

 

Six Flags went bankrupt because their attendance nose dived and the brand bordered on toxic. It wasn't some strange and unforeseen series of events that led to that. They ran their parks like crap and people stopped going.

[Jcoaster]

Exactly my point. How many people you think actually knew Six Flags went bankrupt? I'll wager that a large amount of the GP doesn't know that.

 

Six Flags went bankrupt because their attendance nose dived and the brand bordered on toxic. It wasn't some strange and unforeseen series of events that led to that. They ran their parks like crap and people stopped going.

 

The park attendance has been rising every year since 2010. Thats more than half a decade, so please explain that to me.

[scottm13]

Exactly my point. How many people you think actually knew Six Flags went bankrupt? I'll wager that a large amount of the GP doesn't know that.

 

Six Flags went bankrupt because their attendance nose dived and the brand bordered on toxic. It wasn't some strange and unforeseen series of events that led to that. They ran their parks like crap and people stopped going.

 

The park attendance has been rising every year since 2010. Thats more than half a decade, so please explain that to me.

SF went bankrupt in 2009, which is when the current management took over. There's your explanation.

[DirkFunk]

Exactly my point. How many people you think actually knew Six Flags went bankrupt? I'll wager that a large amount of the GP doesn't know that.

 

Six Flags went bankrupt because their attendance nose dived and the brand bordered on toxic. It wasn't some strange and unforeseen series of events that led to that. They ran their parks like crap and people stopped going.

 

The park attendance has been rising every year since 2010. Thats more than half a decade, so please explain that to me.

 

Six Flags Great Adventure claimed an attendance of 3.8 million people in 1999. In 2009, Six Flags Great Adventure ended the year claiming an attendance of 2.6 million. They lost 30% of their overall attendance in a decade. Yeah, as of 2014, they gained back 150,000 of that 1.2 million people that used to go. Even if extending the season with the new Holiday In The Park event gets them to 3 million, that's not even halfway to where they were in an era where the cost of a season pass, adjusted for inflation, was something like 30-40% higher than what it is now. You could say that Six Flags is still in the process of rebuilding their brand. You might also say that Six Flags has simply decided to take a different sector than everyone else in the market by intentionally running crummy parks that don't cost anything to get into.

 

To put these numbers in perspective: Six Flags Great Adventure lost a number of guests during their operating season (while keeping prices stable or dropping them against inflation!) than total number of turnstile spins at Worlds Of Fun or Valleyfair.

Edited February 3, 2016 by DirkFunk

[larrygator]

They've been selling a product of questionable and sometimes miserable quality for the same exact price for roughly 20 years (no lie, just compared season pass prices at SFGAdv and they're lower now than in '99 for top tier, SFA is only $2 more) to a stagnant/shrinking consumer base. They're gonna take low bidder and not care when the work gets done.

 

The pricing structure of their season passes is a huge problem. Also prices are roughly the same as 20 years ago (cheaper due to inflation) there are nowhere close to making up for it with their parking fee increases.

 

 

Six Flags went bankrupt because their attendance nose dived and the brand bordered on toxic. It wasn't some strange and unforeseen series of events that led to that. They ran their parks like crap and people stopped going.

 

Attendance is not indicative of profit when a park is so reliant on season passes. Was the drop in attendance chain wide? The biggest problem was the unmanagable debt load with insane interest rates which siphoned so much of the revenue that profits could not be achieved.

[scottm13]

Six Flags' strategy is to get as many people into the park as possible, which is why their season passes are so cheap and why they give away the "Thrill Pass" during the summer so that people who purchase a single day ticket can come back for free for the remainder of the summer. They attempt to make up for the lost admissions revenue with expensive parking, in-park food, and merchandise, as well as the advertising that covering the park. The more people they get into the park, the more they make from advertising.

[DirkFunk]

They've been selling a product of questionable and sometimes miserable quality for the same exact price for roughly 20 years (no lie, just compared season pass prices at SFGAdv and they're lower now than in '99 for top tier, SFA is only $2 more) to a stagnant/shrinking consumer base. They're gonna take low bidder and not care when the work gets done.

 

The pricing structure of their season passes is a huge problem. Also prices are roughly the same as 20 years ago (cheaper due to inflation) there are nowhere close to making up for it with their parking fee increases.

 

The pricing structure exists because the assumed value of a day at Six Flags is negligible. Like I pointed out before: compared to the rest of the sector, all of those players have been looking to go the opposite direction as far as season pass pricing is concerned. You could buy over a decade of entry to SFMM for the cost of a single 2015 Disneyland annual pass. This wasn't always the case.

 

Attendance is not indicative of profit when a park is so reliant on season passes. Was the drop in attendance chain wide? The biggest problem was the unmanagable debt load with insane interest rates which siphoned so much of the revenue that profits could not be achieved.

 

Attendance is absolutely indicative of profit when your business plan is entirely centered around repeat business on cheap season passes spending money in park. Attendance dropped for years and was often severe; Worlds of Adventure and Six Flags America are the most glaring examples. I'd argue Astroworld is dead because of the poor planning and execution of their expansion plans at other parks, not because of any tremendous failings at that specific one. It just happened to be on real estate worth money and the management of the company at the time was desperate for cash flow to ward off an otherwise imminent bankruptcy. As we know now, that decision got shareholders to back Redzone and depose them, and the rest is history.

[DirkFunk]

Six Flags' strategy is to get as many people into the park as possible, which is why their season passes are so cheap and why they give away the "Thrill Pass" during the summer so that people who purchase a single day ticket can come back for free for the remainder of the summer. They attempt to make up for the lost admissions revenue with expensive parking, in-park food, and merchandise, as well as the advertising that covering the park. The more people they get into the park, the more they make from advertising.

 

They need to make season passes cheap because the buying public thinks Six Flags is crap and won't pay the kind of prices they will for comparable players in the market there. They'd do all of the exact same things with regards to increasing parking/food/merch prices and various in park upcharges even if the season passes weren't as cheap because increasing prices and creating new revenue streams with existing customers is how a mature industry like regional theme parks continues to show growth even when attendance is generally stagnant. If you need proof, look at everyone else. At some point, Six Flags will hit a ceiling on the number of season passes that they sell at present pricing and they'll need to start selling the same (or nearly the same) number for more money in order to establish revenue growth.

 

TL;DR Six Flags isn't "subsidizing" season pass cost with high food prices. If they thought they could sell season passes for $200 instead of $75, they'd do it in a heart beat and still tag you for $17 for a hockey puck burger and fries. They can't though because the market won't bear the cost.

Edited February 3, 2016 by DirkFunk

[p-sychiatrist]

I won't ignore the fact that Six Flags has put in policies that can make visitors really upset, but opening new rides around summer doesn't seem to impact most guests I've spoken to. The biggest complaints we get are about the loose articles policy and having to pay for lockers. And of course when rides break down (especially Kingda Ka).

[DirkFunk]

I won't ignore the fact that Six Flags has put in policies that can make visitors really upset, but opening new rides around summer doesn't seem to impact most guests I've spoken to. The biggest complaints we get are about the loose articles policy and having to pay for fluffy, fluffy bunnies filled with medicine and goo. And of course when rides break down (especially Kingda Ka).

 

There have a ton of issues historically and presently which affect the brand image of Six Flags. Delaying opening of rides until 2-3 months of the season has passed is not something that positively affects this, I'm fairly certain of that.

[Jcoaster]

I won't ignore the fact that Six Flags has put in policies that can make visitors really upset, but opening new rides around summer doesn't seem to impact most guests I've spoken to. The biggest complaints we get are about the loose articles policy and having to pay for fluffy, fluffy bunnies filled with medicine and goo. And of course when rides break down (especially Kingda Ka).

 

There have a ton of issues historically and presently which affect the brand image of Six Flags. Delaying opening of rides until 2-3 months of the season has passed is not something that positively affects this, I'm fairly certain of that.

 

We can be fairly certain of your dislike of Six Flags and its policies

[larrygator]

Attendance is absolutely indicative of profit when your business plan is entirely centered around repeat business on cheap season passes spending money in park.

 

And here is where I disagree the attendance is indicative of profit because I believe many of the season pass holders who frequent the park most often do not spend money in the park. I know families who will spend more in one day at a park than I will spend in 20 visits. Just look at how many times in this thread that frequent season pass holders tell people interested in SFGAdv to leave the park for lunch and eat at Wawa

[Garet]

Attendance is absolutely indicative of profit when your business plan is entirely centered around repeat business on cheap season passes spending money in park.

 

And here is where I disagree the attendance is indicative of profit because I believe many of the season pass holders who frequent the park most often do not spend money in the park. I know families who will spend more in one day at a park than I will spend in 20 visits. Just look at how many times in this thread that frequent season pass holders tell people interested in SFGAdv to leave the park for lunch and eat at Wawa

 

Everland is in the top 20 for attendance and lots of that is made of season pass holders. I do notice a lot of pass-holders (including whole families of my students who go almost every other weekend) tend to just go for a few hours grab a quick few rides and then leave without spending anything. The shuttle buses are always packed even in the evening with families showing up with season passes for a free night parade and fireworks show.

 

The cost for a normal annual pass here is just under 4 trips. I'm told a daily fireworks show and constant parades are actually quite expensive and a lot of the crowd are people in the area who can pop in for the last 3 hours. Attendance with season passes doesn't always mean profit. Most of their money will come from day trippers who will drive for hours to go to "Korean Disney" and will treat their kids to dinner in the park and souvenirs to remember the day, not the locals who will pick up maybe 1 or 2 gifts a year.

[DirkFunk]

Attendance is absolutely indicative of profit when your business plan is entirely centered around repeat business on cheap season passes spending money in park.

 

And here is where I disagree the attendance is indicative of profit because I believe many of the season pass holders who frequent the park most often do not spend money in the park. I know families who will spend more in one day at a park than I will spend in 20 visits. Just look at how many times in this thread that frequent season pass holders tell people interested in SFGAdv to leave the park for lunch and eat at Wawa

 

That's a great philosophical argument, I suppose. As far as actual pertinence to a company that is using season pass sales as their primary growth driver:

 

http://investors.sixflags.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=61629&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2098324

 

..it doesn't actually mean anything. Like I've said, I dunno, 10-15 times already, what you're talking about is the model everyone else is using, and what Six Flags is doing differentiates from that model significantly. I don't think it is particularly intelligent; you point out the fact that season pass holders don't necessarily spend more per visit, and that's true and also shows up in their model. But they seem to think that they have a better shot of showing revenue increases each year by selling more season passes and seeing those people return often and spend less (because that's precisely what happens) than by trying to sell a premium product at a premium price.

Edited February 3, 2016 by DirkFunk