Dumb weather report was wrong!

The statistics are helpful but only proves my point further if you actually examine the numbers. The flaw in your logic is you make the unfounded assumption that an unhappy customer will pay an additional admission fee to gamble that the park will provide them better service (rides are running) the next time they visit the park during the year (if ever). You also fail to realize that approximately 1/3 of the parks admission sales comes from season / platinum pass holders (according to a stat that I believe Jeff previously provided some time ago). You also ignore that if a guest is in the park on 2 separate days they could potentially spend the average amount of $14.69 each day for a total of $29.38. That amount is actually higher than the average admission and does not reduce profit from admissions. Rain checks generate money, they do not loose money.

It is the same rational for the park issuing season / platinum passes. If a platinum pass holder visits the park 10 times in a summer; according to your figures they would average spending $146.90 in the park. Would that platinum pass holder have spent the full admission price 10 times during the season if they hadn't received such a value from the pass? Undoubtedly, someone on this site will say they would have but the truth is that it is unlikely that the park would see as many return visits from platinum pass holders if they had to pay full admission. That is the only reason the park issues season / platinum passes. They count on the return visits from happy customers who believe they are getting a good value. That is the same thing a rain check does. A rain check just would not allow unlimited visits. Obviously some restrictions would be placed on rain checks. A customer is far more likely to return to the park even after using a rain check and pay full admission again than if they did not have a good experience the first time. When examined closely, there is no argument to justify the current policy.

More to the point of this thread. The stats prove the park lost out on at least $29.38, in revenue today because shamrock and his mom decided not to visit the park today. They can never make that up now even when they do decide to visit the park. Shame on the park and the bad no rain check policy.

EDIT: How many other people made the decision today as shamrock and his mom? How much revenue is lost throughout the year by people making the same decision? How much revenue is the park throwing away by the bad policy?

... and the park really doesn't care about the vacation days we use. There will always be another vacation day.

Your constant posting the same thing in every thread is hurting my head.

I will be so happy when you are "disappeared".

Walt, the problem you have with your explanation is you are using data, stats and logic to explain why rain checks don:t make a good business decision to Guru that clearly doesn't understand that level of thinking.

Clearly its time for Guru to stop beating this drum and move on.

The ironic thing is I think we all want what is best for the park and we all love coasters. What differs is what approach is best. I say the park should respect its customers with customer friendly policies and lots of people seem to think the customer is the enemy and should somehow be punished for being foolish enough to spend their money at the park. While I am the only one who has remained consistent in my rational; others have argued that the park shouldn't extend its operating season because of the threat of poor weather. Those same people then contradict themselves by saying guest must gamble their vacations in the hope that management doesn't ruin their time at the park by closing attractions due to poor weather. A better weather / rain check policy would address both issues and raise more revenue for the park. Not one person has been able to debunk this proven business philosophy used by practically every other business in the world.

I think some people need to ask themselves why attendance has fallen for the last 20 years despite the number of and quality of improvements that have been made to the park? How long can the park keep raising prices to generate record revenue despite falling attendance? I think that would be more interesting to discuss rather trying to insult people all the time.

I've been harping on the "per cap up, attendance down" trend for years. But, I think that has less to do with their rain check policies and more to do with the fact that they continue to say they want to be more family friendly while continuing to invest in thrill rides that are not suitable for anyone under 10 years old.

Teenagers and young adults who are drawn to the thrill rides are not the ones spending money in the park.

Agreed, but family friendly and good customer relations are related. When families attend the park you are generally referring to 3 or more people who also often include teenagers. If families have to gamble on weather, they can choose other options that don't include wasting their money because of bad park policy.

The PointGuru said:
How long can the park keep raising prices to generate record revenue despite falling attendance?

Until their scores of data suggest they're reaching a point where higher prices will begin to erode their repeatedly-record revenue and profit. They have yet to reach that point. Business 101.

In other words until the bubble burst. That is a popular strategy and doesn't maximize the record profits; but if history teaches us anything it is not a very good strategy.

My. Eyes. BLEED. MAKE IT STOP.

2 things... shamrock is a girl :) Not that it matters but it's funny to see posts referring to me as a man.

Secondly, my point was more so for the weather forecasters. I have to learn not to trust what they predict as they usually provide a worst case scenario, and I need to be more optimistic. Looking at the radar yesterday, it did look like the rain was dissipating in Indiana but the hour by hour kept saying 60% (which still means there is a 40% chance it might not rain) but when every hour looked that way we didn't want to risk it. I'm guessing that as more technology comes out, they will become more reliable (I hope)!

I agree with 45 and some others. Please, for the love of god make the madness stop! Can we take a vote and kick them off the island already?

The PointGuru said:
...but if history teaches us anything it is not a very good strategy.

Umm, wow.

Slightly off-topic, can I buy some of what you're smoking?

Chief Wahoo said:
I've been harping on the "per cap up, attendance down" trend for years. But, I think that has less to do with their rain check policies and more to do with the fact that they continue to say they want to be more family friendly while continuing to invest in thrill rides that are not suitable for anyone under 10 years old.

Teenagers and young adults who are drawn to the thrill rides are not the ones spending money in the park.

But then why are per caps going up? If the folks drawn to thrill rides do not spend money and the park doesn't have enough family rides to attact families who spend a lot of money in the park, shouldn't per caps be going down as well as attendance?

Any discussion about attendance has to include the reality that Detroit and Cleveland are still the major draws for the park. Over the last 10-20 years, there has been pretty much zero population growth in those two metropolitan areas. And the middle class in those areas has been negatively impacted by the erosion of union manufacturing jobs.

Every pricing decision that any business makes involves striking a balance. Reducing a price may increase sales volumes but decrease profits (because the additional buyers are not sufficient to overcome the loss of revenue from those who would have bought at the higher price). Goal is to maximize profits over the long term. Offering rain checks is a pricing decision. To evaluate any pricing decision, you need a lot more data than what we have available as armchair QBs on an amusement park site. Could management be making the wrong decision on any given pricing decision? Sure. Could they change their mind on any of those decisions at some point down the road? Yes and they have. Sometimes its because the decision was wrong initially. Other times it is because the market changes.

Unless he/she predicts 100% or 0% chance of rain, a weather forecaster can never be wrong.

And I am not convinced that with all of the technology we have today, that weather forecasting is any more accurate. The display of the forecasts is better with multi color graphics, doppler 45,000, etc. And the ability to report on it as it happens is better as well.

The rise in per cap spending is explained by the increased prices and expanded profit margins. Yes, those are pricing decisions. Teenagers, if they earn income on their own are generally supplemented by their families income. However, a rain check is more of a customer service issue than a pricing decision. The customer already paid the agreed upon price for admission, a rain check merely acknowledges the park did not deliver the value expected by the customer. If a customer returns to the park by using a rain check, it is not a "free" admission. It is just a continuation of their initial paid attendance, when they likely left the park early. Obviously, we do not have all the information management has. Finally, someone else acknowledges park management sometimes makes mistakes even when they have more information than we do. They need to change the rain check policy. Records profits generated by increased prices only mask the real problem of dropping attendance and poor customer relations. If people can't see or understand the problem it can't be fixed.

I like what Ouimet has said and done since taking over. He seems to get it. He has publicly stated employee moral needs to be improved because employee moral has a direct effect on customer service. He has taken actions or made plans effecting employees that Kinzel never would have considered. As stated before, changing the rain check policy is just one step that needs to happen to correct the whole backward culture of park management that fosters poor customer relations.

David B said:
Hey! At least they have the flag flying the right direction today!

+10

When I was a kid, before anyone in my family had season passes, if a day at the park had a lot of rain we did not leave the park early. We watched shows, rode on Dodgem and other rides that ran in the rain, saw the fish at Sealand, played games in the arcade and ate at indoor sit-down restaurants. We enjoyed CP even in the rain, and we made plans to return another day when the weather will hopefully be good to enjoy a day in the sun at CP. That of course meant buying another round of admission tickets.

I don't think my family is that different than a lot of other families. By my example, the "guru's" rain check would most certainly mean the park is giving away free admissions and reducing revenue.

Guru, your arguments are getting extremely stale and you are polluting this site with the same nonsensical rants in threads of different topics.

Rain check policy is a pricing decision because you are setting the price someone needs to pay if they want to come back to the park in certain circumatances. Any pricing decision has an impact on customer service.

What has to be analyzed is how many people will come back with a rain check who wouldn't come back anyway (and pay for another admission). And how many people are coming back now and paying for another admission without rain checks. Any how many people are staying away because of the weather who would otherwise come to the park if there was a rain check policy. I don't have that data. The park does (though some of it would by definition be at least somewhat speculative).

From what I have seen, Six Flags is trying a rain check policy at one of its parks this year with the idea of rolling it out to other parks in the chain if its successful. Jury is out at this point.

Pete said:
We enjoyed CP even in the rain, and we made plans to return another day...

That is my point with the rain check. Each family can choose what they want to do. It is not dictated to them by the park. Yours and many families choose to stay. Judging by the hordes of people that leave the park when it rains and the shorter lines after a good period of rain I would say not all families did as you describe, not to mention there are even less family activities now. Dino's alive doesn't work real well in the rain either.

I'm sorry you feel the arguments are stale. They are interconnected to many different topics discussed. I think GoBucks gives park management too much credit for how much information they have and how much they analyze it; but, no one really knows for sure. If more people shared their opinion with park management like I have. perhaps things could change quicker and these stale arguments wouldn't be an issue.