Six Flags assessing surcharges and more

[BoddaH1994]

I’ve seen this circulated online for a few days now. Can anyone confirm authenticity?

If it’s true, behold your future. 

[disco2000]

Caveat emptor 

[BeeastFarmer]

Doubtful. Appears photoshopped, and even six flags would catch the grammar mistake...unless they are borrowing communication directors from other companies.

[BoddaH1994]

2 minutes ago, BeeastFarmer said:

Doubtful. Appears photoshopped, and even six flags would catch the grammar mistake...unless they are borrowing communication directors from other companies.

I hope it’s fake. It’s widely spread though. 
 

Just imagine paying $22 for a cup-sized portion of food at Grain & Grill and a drink and adding a $1 because their costs are too high. That’ll go great!

[BeeastFarmer]

4 minutes ago, BoddaH1994 said:

I hope it’s fake. It’s widely spread though. 
 

Just imagine paying $22 for a cup-sized portion of food at Grain & Grill and a drink and adding a $1 because their costs are too high. That’ll go great!

Also, this particular post says "if you are using a credit card..." Six Flags is cashless, I believe.

[TombRaiderFTW]

I'm not suggesting this is a good practice, but let me add some perspective to hopefully help keep this thread from falling into more anti-Six Flags hysterics: This comes after a couple years of the SeaWorld parks doing a 5% surcharge on all transactions, for similar reasons.

What I'd like to know is why chains see this as a better move than to simply raise prices. Who's going to notice that prices at Six Flags jumped $1? Why is $0.99 the point at which leadership goes, "We've got to blame the economy and our workers for this to save face?"

Unless, of course, this surcharge actually has nothing to do with the economy and is actually about increasing revenue...? I wonder if there's some value in being able to point out increased revenues to their shareholders when it comes time to vote on the merger.

But like, I also get that the economy isn't great right now, so it could just be what it says on the tin. But I still want to know why adding the surcharge makes more sense than increasing prices.

EDIT: Just to corroborate this entire situation, here's a tweet with a picture of a menu at SFoG showing the surcharge: https://twitter.com/OnlineHyde/status/1726370435510497582?t=oBC0V9GgssWl1iwiuUJNIQ&s=19

[BoddaH1994]

1 hour ago, TombRaiderFTW said:

I'm not suggesting this is a good practice, but let me add some perspective to hopefully help keep this thread from falling into more anti-Six Flags hysterics: This comes after a couple years of the SeaWorld parks doing a 5% surcharge on all transactions, for similar reasons.

What I'd like to know is why chains see this as a better move than to simply raise prices. Who's going to notice that prices at Six Flags jumped $1? Why is $0.99 the point at which leadership goes, "We've got to blame the economy and our workers for this to save face?"

Unless, of course, this surcharge actually has nothing to do with the economy and is actually about increasing revenue...? I wonder if there's some value in being able to point out increased revenues to their shareholders when it comes time to vote on the merger.

But like, I also get that the economy isn't great right now, so it could just be what it says on the tin. But I still want to know why adding the surcharge makes more sense than increasing prices.

EDIT: Just to corroborate this entire situation, here's a tweet with a picture of a menu at SFoG showing the surcharge: https://twitter.com/OnlineHyde/status/1726370435510497582?t=oBC0V9GgssWl1iwiuUJNIQ&s=19

They're charging $15.49 for a Cobb salad. An extra $1 is a cash grab. 

[Oldiesmann]

Reports are now coming out saying that the $1.30 surcharge is being dropped from all parks.