KI Guy

I understand their reasoning but I question the change. Generally I don't like adding additional friction to spend money for even a subset of the customer base. They seem willing to inconvenience a subgroup under the auspices of helping the majority. For that reason, it reminds me of the change in the smoking policy last year. I guess it worked for games because they still use those cards. I know I haven't bothered with the games since because those were always a spur of the moment thing.

^ I know that was directed at the thread in general, but I never said it was the predominant motivator. I said I can imagine a very small subset of visitors see FL and decide to cut. You can disagree with that possibility, but it's hardly absurd.

^ Solid post all around. One additional thing I'd like to add is they, like all public companies, are susceptible to people who only care about pumping revenue now at the potental detriment of the business long term. Long-term investors and people on the board who care about the company outside of its monetary value should be vigilent.

^ Simply because they could use it to their advantage. Cinemark Oakley doesn't care how KI is perceived, but how they're perceived. If they were looking for even the faintest excuse to implement that policy, the incident at KI provided that cover. The incident at KI was caused by irresponsible young people and Cinemark Oakley's policy relates to irresponsible young people. To them it's better to say an incident at KI resulted in this rather than hurting their own reputation by saying incidents at their theater resulted in this. Ethically questionable for sure.

^Yes, I meant 'always' as in within the frame of memory of the customers, which is what matters when talking about how a business model is seen by the public. Of course there was a time when any business operated differently than it does now. It's always been a reality that some people will pay more for a better experience. There was likely caution against implementing a Fast Lane system in previous years because of the potential for backlash and bad long-term effects. When they implemented FL they decided to take a chance. Right now they seem to be doing ok with it, but it will take a long time to see if it has been a long-term positive for the business.

I know you are saying this somewhat in jest, but the reality is that's always been the business model for sporting events and theater. Amusement parks pre-FL hadn't offered tiered experiences on a large scale since the days of ride tickets. It's a big change and it needs to be thought of as such. In time FL could become as normal as pay one price admission was. Alternatively, we may see a move away from it should there be long-term negative effects, we just don't know yet.

^My mistake. I conflated KK and KI. Still though they used Kings Island as an excuse to minimize blowback.

Its highly likely Cinemark Oakley wanted to do this for some time, but they saw KI change their policy and could now use their change as an excuse to hide behind. It's a shame that things like this are being put in place. Have kids in general gotten that much worse than before?

I think although Fast Lane hurts non-FL guests' experience (because it has to), the issue got much worse when they started selling the season pass add-on version. It used to be that you could go to the park on a less busy day and next to no one would buy the FL add-on. On these days you could still get the fast moving lines we fondly remember. Now, since many have the perk as a season pass add-on, they will never wait in the regular line regardless of what day they go. This has resulted in a more defined A and B grade experience between FL and non-FL. I think the typical day at the park for the traditional season passholder has suffered quite a bit. People accepted original add-on to ticket/entry FL so they moved on to FL plus. People accepted FL Plus so they moved on to season pass Fast Lane. It's quite a move they pulled because they essentially got people to pay additional money for something which as a group they were already getting-- shorter waits in line. If I were running the park, I'd eliminate FL while increasing season pass prices because I think delivering a consistently good experience is more important than a cheaper experience that can be hit or miss.

Pay-to-cut systems like Fast Lane probably contribute to line jumping in a small way. I can imagine a very small subset of folks see the Fast Lane people getting ahead of them in line and decide "if they can do it so can I" and they jump the regular line. They may feel a little like Robin Hood at that point. It's funny to me that the only reason Fast Lane is tolerated at all is that they try to make the regular line not see it. If Fast Lane was replaced by a system where they just were able to walk through the regular line past 80% of guests people would absolutely lose it.

I think it just depends on how you look at it. I don't see it as limiting your ROI. While one demographic is turned off another is more enthused. I do recognize there are limits to this like the previously mentioned Intimidator 305. I think the park is big enough that they can have a very intense coaster and be fine. There will be some who come to the park just for that. I know that's not the usual approach with what has become a rather conservative publicly owned company. The board wants to see they spent X on the 202X investments and increased revenue by Y dollars. They don't want to see that they spent X on shoring up a smaller demographic for Y years, made the park ride lineup more diverse/distinctive and additional revenue is less clear. Since coasters are 25+ year investments, I think it's shortsighted to only think of how it will increase pass or ticket sales the first year or the second, but I know why public companies think so short term which acknowledges your point. The fact that the intense rides from RMC and Intamin exist, at least to an extent, proves that "something for everyone" can be accomplished with a more diverse group of rides rather than a large number of the "crowd pleaser" type of rides of B&M. I think KI had done a good job to not "overlap" their rides until Orion came out and provided a fairly similar feel to Diamondback. If the lineup was better before Orion and with Firehawk and Vortex can be debated, but few could argue it was not more diverse. The diversity I think means more time in the park because it limits "we already rode Orion so we can skip Diamondback etc."

White Water Canyon. It's the best river rapids ride I've been on by far. Most are compact and zig zag on flat land out in the open but WWC is sprawling over terrain in the woods. *Also before Mystic Timbers and to a lesser extent Diamondback it felt like you were WAY out in the woods far away from the park. It was even more awesome for that.

I definitely agree on the trees. As far as intense rides go, I think the great thing about having 10+ roller coasters is that they all don't have to appeal to the entire group of coaster riders. KI has already done this with the family and milder thrill segment, (Adventure Express, Backlot) but hasn't put money into the extreme intensity/forces part of the spectrum at KI (which today I'd say consist of mostly RMC's and Intamin). Just as not every food option is for everyone, I'm ok with not every coaster being for everyone. In the same vane, only a portion of guests go to the waterpark on a consistent basis. Some go all summer, but never go to Haunt. Sometimes one thing you love can be worth more than three things you like. That would be nice, but a big part of me would like to see something along the lines of the old Keelboat Canal. That would bring a lot of Rivertown feel back to the area. I know water rides are not en vogue right now, but someone has to start any given trend. If I were a betting man though, I would say that the next attraction on that site will utilize that building in some way. It's just too big of an asset to part with.

After seeing the site without Vortex on it I was surprised to see how non-flat that plot is. Unless they want to do some serious land leveling, I doubt that a midway would go there. I think it would have to be something like a coaster or log flume. The land doesn't need to be flat for something like that.

^ My mistake, thank you. *Original post now corrected*

A good point BoddaH. Since Herschend now operates Kentucky Kingdom, we'll see if they can do both. While I obviously love and enjoy KI, I acknowledge that Dollywood offers a premium experience over KI in nearly all aspects except number of thrill rides-- and Dollywood continues to grow on that front. For the additional $80-95 dollars, Dollywood has better passholder discounts, more live entertainment, and more special events. I've always found the landscaping, staff friendliness, and cleanliness phenomenal. KI has some very talented staff as well, but as a group, they just don't seem to have reached the Dollywood level. They can only do with the resources and leadership they are given and I believe Dollywood allocates more funds to staffing and landscaping or they may just budget it better. If CF were ever to be bought out, or KI sold off, I would want it to go to Herschend. I think they could put KI in a slot between KK and Dollywood in terms of pricing and experience.

In the short term, yes. In the long-term, there's no way, at least under any seasonal amusement park business model we've seen. The overhead with running an amusement park is huge. Lots of labor, lots of utilities, high maintenance /upkeep costs etc and the revenue is seasonal. That means that unless amusement parks are to become something much less accessible to the average person labor costs will have to go down from these high rates in the long-term. What we're seeing now is a a frenzy to get workers just to ensure the business stays alive. $18-20 for seasonal amusement park work would have been absolutely bonkers two years ago. CF knows they NEED their parks to have some semblance of a normal year this year or they could REALLY be in trouble. Once a guest breaks the habit/cycle of being a passholder or making a yearly trip, they very well could stay away. The usual HS and college students will probably happily line up for jobs at something like the old pay rates once the job market (and unemployment) changes, but KI has to pay up now to avoid some seriously bad consequences.

They are testing the customers' patience at this point. They cut hours when they have a full green light from the state and said they were fully staffed. If this is going on at other CF parks, they are not acting like a company that has to pay back a billion dollar loan in four years. Herschend- if you want to be a big player, start planning your move.

A Fast Lane system does devalue a season pass or a daily ticket since it will take more time to do the same level of stuff at the park if a Fast Lane exists rather than not. Alternatively guests could do the same amount of stuff, but only if they go on less crowded days. This would devalue the pass/ticket as the passholder wouldn't have as much flexibility on when he or she would want to go to the park. You are correct that the season pass/ticket prices may be higher if FL did not exist, but this also would hurt the daily experience as more people would be buying passes and tickets making waits and crowds larger. Of course more customers may exist because they might not be able to afford the park at a higher price point. As long as they don't lose sight of guest experience in the name of short term revenue, they will probably be okay. They likely are being smart about this, but as I said before, there's always a temptation to act in the short term when it comes to publicly traded companies. Reply to quick edit: I agree that they have decided to keep the low price point on the passes. That calculation is quantity (number of passes) vs. quality (how exclusive a pass is which heavily affects daily attendance). That may sound bad, but deciding to offer a season pass in the early 80s was a similar calculation.

The calculation has been made that the extra revenue from the Fast Lane is worth devaluing the season pass and standard daily ticket. I just hope for their sake that the calculation includes long term potential effects and opportunity costs. How many people are not getting season passes or daily tickets because of the reduced daily experience? If they leave, do they come back? How much more would guests be willing to pay for season passes if the experience were better, (lines went faster without Fast Lane)? Would these guests stay longer and spend more money? Although they likely know what they're doing in the long term, it's always a possibility with public corporations that they are pumping attendance and revenue in the short term for stock price reasons rather than doing what is best in the long term interest of the business. Making more money now is not always a good thing unless you're a short term CEO after a bonus or a frequent stock trader.

Yes, my mistake. I accidently edited out some of my original wording trying to shorten the post. I meant to say I don't believe anyone working minimum wage ever made it as a sole breadwinner working 40 hours a week (**Edited to correct). A possible difference between you and me is I would be more inclined to say that this person should get a second job, or take on more hours, or at least take on a roommate or two to pool resources and bring down living costs. And this would only be until this person develops more skills or education. Also I used inflation because I was following on what matt 112986 said. Lastly, I don't know how you've come to the determination that a minimum wage hike (especially to $15) benefits everyone. All increased wage costs will be passed on to the customer and will nullify themselves in short time as costs increase prices which customers pay. Seeing the higher prices, they themselves demand a higher wage, and some, a wage increase parallel to the minimum wage increase. Automation and outsourcing are always getting rid of low paying "unskilled" labor. A hike in the minimum wage provides an incentive to get rid of the position entirely speeding up automation and job losses. This is my last post of this nature as we are getting away from KI in the conversation.

I believe this comes from a good place. I don't want to see people out on the street either. However, here are some points to consider in addition to the one I raised earlier. 1. How do you arrive at $15? Why not $20 or $25? If it's the arbitrary living wage, how do you determine that amount? Different people and households have different needs and spending habits. 2. Realize that whatever increase in low end pay will undoubtedly result in more expensive labor at middle and high income positions. If I'm working a somewhat "skilled" job at $16 an hour and minimum wage shoots up to $15 will I still be happy at $16? Of course not! I would expect my wage to increase relative to minimum wage. I would need to make $21 or so to maintain my relative level of pay. To pay for all of this the value of the dollar is cheapened through inflation. Any wage bump for the minimum wage worker (assuming his job is not eliminated) is just a shell game that will only raise his real pay (buying power) in the very short term. After that, it is an increase in name only because his buying power is the same relativeto others and the new value of the dollar. It holds true whether the minimum wage is raised or not that your work value whether $10 an hour or $100 is directly tied to what someone is willing to pay me which is itself determined by the value I bring to the business. 3. Regarding your point about minimum wage not keeping up with inflation. Minimum wage has kept somewhat close to inflation since 1960. Although the wages have not kept up completely this holds true for wages in general outside of top earners. https://www.dollartimes.com/inflation/items/1960-united-states-minimum-wage I don't believe anyone ever made it as a sole breadwinner working a minimum wage job 40 hours a week without assistance. I believe this is a fairly new belief that's caught on in recent years. 4. For heads of household who's only income is through a minimum wage job, taxpayers pick up the slack. Medicaid, Food Stamps, the Earned Income tax credit, and other programs provide resources to people who earn below a certain level. These programs together increase (in free resources, reduced costs, and in tax breaks) what a minimum wage worker receives day to day far beyond the dollar amount on their paycheck.

^The issue with this is some jobs do not return 15 dollars an hour in value. If $15 is mandated you will simply see less employees to make up the difference. The game will be changed to keep the doors open on a given business. This is part of the reason I don't like u-scan at Kroger or touchscreen ordering at McDonald's. I think that a job to get started is better than no job at all.

Given how tight the margins are in the amusement park business I wonder if this is sustainable. Could this be a temporary measure to get employees during the pandemic? Good for the employees though. I'm sure they're stoked.

That's truly amazing you had that on hand. Do you collect papers on amusement parks?