Point Pavilion

DSShives said:
From a pure business aspect, I cant think if a single reason to combine the gates. The onsite resorts are a game changer there. Why would you throw that money away?

I'm trying to understand your point. What is the business advantage of keeping them separate? Why are the onsite resorts a game changer? What money would be thrown away?

Today, if you're staying at "the resort," and you want to visit _____, then you buy a ticket and visit _____. In the dystopian future where the parks are combined, you buy the same ticket and visit either park. Granted a SC ticket today is < than a CP ticket, but I think the concept of the "combination/park hopper" ticket would warrant the upcharge.

Actually, Im trying to understand your point. Have you ever sat there and watched the number of people that are buying tickets to Soak City on a hot summer day? If you include Soak City gate with a CP general admission ticket, thats money lost.

Why throw in a separate gate fee that is producing a good revenue stream?

^ his point is that all of those people buying tickets for Soak City on those hot days you speak of will now be forced to pay the $60 gate price of a hypothetical "combined CP/SC"

I don't see how anyone thinks that combining the parks into one admission is feasible. If 100 people buy a SC ticket, that's $3,000 that day. If 1,000 people bought SC tickets, that's $30,000. In order to compensate for that loss, the tickets would most likely need to be at least $75. And that increase would make less sense now since SC is closed for the season.

^ you are assuming that there would be a large population that would try to do both in one day. I personally don't think there would be many that would try to do both in one day or that combining the parks would somehow force people to stay less.

Currently you are suggesting there are people who go to CP, pay admission, then half way through the day when it's hot go to Soak city's gate and purchase an additional ticket- I doubt that happens.

The price breakdown can be seen here for resort guests:

https://www.cedarpoint.com/places-to-stay

As you can see, the park isn't making additional money off of Soak City as a separate gate, which makes the whole "the resorts are next door, keep them separate" a mute point. There is no logical way the park is making more $$ off of Soak City with resort guests with the current price structure. A one day ride/slide is $55, $5 less than a one day CP only ticket. In fact the 2 day Cedar Point only ticket is the same price as the 2 day ride/slide ticket.

Looking at the current price structure actually supports a possible merging of the parks, in the 1990's the structure was completely different, possibly positioning SC to maybe make a difference.

To me In combining parks you create more opportunities for additional revenue. We have a local park with a waterpark as part of it- so we spend the day at the pool and then when leaving the kids want to ride a few rides, then we may grab ice cream, play a few games, watch a show, Oops- we better grabs bite to eat for dinner, then pick up a souvenir as we leave. Suddenly the park has a few extra dollars than they would have from me if I had just gone to the waterpark. I think it adds up in more ways than just admission.

Well, Soak City has ice cream, hot food, drinks and adult beverages right in the water park. Your example does not work for Soak City.

To those that can't understand why Soak City is a separate gate, at least understand that the people running CP have a firm grasp of how their revenue flows. Soak City is a separate gate because they make more money like that.

I would hate to see Soak City combined with the park. On hot days we go to Soak City and eat at one of the out-of-park places and head for home. Never sitting foot in the park. Very seldom do we spend time in both Soak City and Cedar Point.

I've sat in enough wet seats on rides, left by people who rode the water rides with out changing afterwards. If Soak City were part of the ride park there would be more wet seats from people who just throw on a t-shirt and then ride.

Sure would like to meet some of you guys at Bubbles sometime. Maybe we should have a pointbuzz tattoo. LOL

Pete said:
To those that can't understand why Soak City is a separate gate, at least understand that the people running CP have a firm grasp of how their revenue flows. Soak City is a separate gate because they make more money like that.

Right, the question is how. I get that you didn't have anything really tangible to add other than "trust them," but that doesn't mean it's not fun to speculate on the how.

^ everyone is basing the idea on the former price structure.

https://www.cedarpoint.com/places-to-stay

Based on the above prices, there is no evidence that Soak City is a cash cow for the property as far as resort guests. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw an overhaul of Soak City in 2016 and it all under one gate. They would be getting $60 for admission on each person no matter what park they're in... vs only $30/person for those in Soak City.

^^^ Bluestreaker +1. Perfectly stated.

If SC wasn't making that much money from ticket sales, I'm sure they would've combined the parks a long time ago.

I would assume that some of the extra profit some Soak City comes from people lengthening their stay at the resorts. Just a thought but it seems the most likely scenario to me.

^ they aren't... Read the prices for resort guests

https://www.cedarpoint.com/places-to-stay

I don't think you understand what it is I'm saying. I believe the length of stay is longer, resulting in more revenue from selling rooms, not necessarily the gate price.

I really don't think Soak City having a separate gate makes people stay longer.

Part of the problem with this discussion is that people have been tossing out some statements (like below) without really explaining or rationalizing, soooo, questions naturally remain:

Increasing the price for a combined gate would be a losing calculation.
Why? What is the rationalization that explains how it would be a loss?

You've got a perfect add-on revenue generator for Soak City.
What is the perfect add-on generator, and how is it the perfect add-on revenue generator?

It would be a terrible business decision to give it away.
How would it be a terrible business decision?

The onsite resorts are a game changer there. Why would you throw that money away?
How are the resorts a game changer, and what money is being thrown away?

Scottyf said:

Increasing the price for a combined gate would be a losing calculation.
Why? What is the rationalization that explains how it would be a loss?

While increasing the price wouldn't necessarily be a loss, not everybody wants to go to Soak City. And during Halloweekends, when Soak City is closed, the extra value is thrown away. And those who don't want to go to SC would be less likely to go to CP altogether because they don't want to pay the increased price when there is no extra value to them.

You've got a perfect add-on revenue generator for Soak City.
What is the perfect add-on generator, and how is it the perfect add-on revenue generator?

Not everyone that goes to SC is a platinum passholder. It can generate significant revenue at the gate without increasing the ticket price to the regular park.

It would be a terrible business decision to give it away.
How would it be a terrible business decision?

Pretty much the reasons above.

The onsite resorts are a game changer there. Why would you throw that money away?
How are the resorts a game changer, and what money is being thrown away?

When you get people staying on property, they would be more likely to go to SC. They may be multi-day ticket buyers or platinum passes, but there is still a good number of people who will pay the extra fee to go to SC. I think I'm done with this topic, if anybody can explain it better than I can, go ahead. The parks are fine the way they are now. If it isn't broke, don't fix it.

If something was broken, they would fix it. If they do fix something, we will know that it was perceived as broken. Until then? How about we stop bickering over such pointless matters and get back to watching paint dry (on Mantarou)?

Yeah, I'm out too. It's too difficult to be allowed an opinion without someone who knows "everything" telling you that you are wrong. But if that's how some people get through life, carry on.