Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
Status
Not open for further replies.
If it’s a diminishing portion of their guests it makes sense to invest in trying to reinvigorate that guest base.
The diminishing portion of their guests is the locals, so yes it does make sense to reinvest to reinvigorate that guest base. This doesn't reinvigorate the locals, that is my point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deacfan31
Sort of an apples and oranges though since Disneyland is a destination park that mostly attracts tourists whereas BGW is a regional park that mostly attracts locals. Saying locals are Disneyland’s “core fan base” just isn’t accurate.
Yea, but Club 33 is just that…..it’s a club. Visitors that travel
to Disneyland aren’t going nor can the go unless they are members or with a member.

Also have you beed to Disneyland? It’s mainly locals…..they wear their club patches…..there’s mostly locals. I agree now it’s lass locals but only because Disney has made it hard for locals to get in with the pass system and prk reservations.
 
Last edited:
Yea, but Club 33 is just that…..it’s a club. Visitors that travel
to Disneyland aren’t going nor can the go unless they are members or with a member.

I think you’re reading too far into the comparison. The point is that both Club 33 and this speakeasy are exclusive, intimate locations that target a very different audience from the majority of their respective parks’ guests.
 
I agree with that comparison, however the reason Club 33 is justified is because almost everything else WDW does constantly pleases more and more of their largest guest base, the tourists. BGW has added this exclusive thing for the guests they are already trying to attract with all their other moves, giving nothing upon nothing back to their supposed majority audience of locals. That's the issue.

If guest experience things like shows, culinary, employee training, unique merchandising and craftsmanship were always prioritized to retain that loyal base than I'd say this addition is pretty smart, like when tours and Escape Rooms first came around. Nice exclusive upcharge thing for locals to enjoy once or twice but then to get their main money off the one time visitors and attract more one timers who wants that experience. But they have decided to add something to appeal to the people they are already appealing to, rather than try to claw back some of the lost local audience. My whole point was that a speakeasy is literally the definition of something locals can benefit from as only people who go there enough to notice the difference would notice it, like a nice secret area for locals to enjoy. If I lived nearby it would be an immediate reason for me to go way more frequently and it would've been so easy for them.
 
People seem to be misunderstanding me. I agree that this speakeasy they have made isn't targeting locals, it is in fact targeting people there all day who want an experience. My point is I think that is who they continue to target with everything they are doing and will pay the price, and this particular experience was a golden opportunity to throw the locals a bone, an audience they have been shafting for years now. Hence why I think this is a failure compared to what it could've been for a diminishing portion of their guests, of which I am not even a part of. This is a win for consumers like me, but I know this park's wellbeing doesn't survive off people like me.
So because your local and probably a passholder they should cater to what you feel is acceptable and good for you. To hell with the tourists or the people that may only go to the park 1 or 2 times a year.
I agree a little pricy but I am going to give it a chance before I say it stinks
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: Ice
@MIKEYT67 You should read what I said again, as I said on more than one occasion that I myself am not a local. Even in the post you quote, I say "this is a failure compared to what it could've been for a diminishing portion of their guests, of which I am not even a part of" after talking about them losing locals.

Again, I think this is a business error and a terrible decision on their chosen direction with this concept, regardless of how good the product ends up being. Never once did I say this is gonna stink.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: BGWnut
This is very much a "I did it, I enjoyed it, don't feel the need to do it again" type experience when you consider the price tag and time required for it. This is an endeavor that requires booking in advance, fronting around $100, and committing the time to show up for the entire experience..
So like both the fireworks cruise and the park tours, of which the park currently offers six different varieties?

Acknowledging the rest of your post, the above question remains.
 
So like both the fireworks cruise and the park tours, of which the park currently offers six different varieties?

Acknowledging the rest of your post, the above question remains.
What I said directly in the portion you quoted, when you consider the price tag and the time required (both booking and participating). The pricing of the tours I would consider semi-repeatable are fairly priced around $30 or less per person (Collies, Wolves, Train) with the more expensive ones clearly being one timers (elite VIP, roller coaster tours, etc.). I mean correct me if I am wrong, but have you met a large number of locals who marathon the tours? Sure a lot of people have done them once or maybe twice, but I am confused as to how you think my point does not hold true to these as well. The ones I would assume have been repeated are the cheaper tours, especially when you consider the cost for this is $100 given the minimum guests requirement (of which I have not seen proof of myself, I have just seen others speaking of, and I assume is accurate). As far as the river cruise goes, I see that as an experience with higher repeatability than a show with drinks experience, though that is an entirely separate rant.

Consumer psychology, people are more likely to spend more money on several smaller charges than one large charge. Once someone walks away having dropped the grand total over $100 for them and one other person to have a show and some drinks, the likelihood that they will run it back is extremely slim. But if you charge $15 per drink like they do around HoS, people are more likely to get a drink or two every time they visit, and that adds up fast. Same thing with the tours, especially when you factor in the kid-friendliness of some of the tours and the increase likelihood for people to spend money on experiences for their children.

Even so, the large numbers of tour options backs up my overall claim that the park is targeting the day-long destination trippers more than the locals. The thing up for debate here is if targeting that group is more beneficial to the business long term than targeting locals, yet that is the bit not being talked about.
 
The diminishing portion of their guests is the locals, so yes it does make sense to reinvest to reinvigorate that guest base. This doesn't reinvigorate the locals, that is my point.
Is that known for sure? You just said that out of towners are diminishing. And BGW is saying overall they are up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BGWnut
When did I say out of towners are diminishing? I think they are probably increasing in concentration at the park if anything, but that doesn't mean they are there to stay.
 
The thing up for debate here is if targeting that group is more beneficial to the business long term than targeting locals, yet that is the bit not being talked about.
Locals are less likely to spend more money on extras. That’s not a complicated answer. What kind of extra would a member or local pay for over and over?
 
What kind of extra would a member or local pay for over and over?
They wouldn't, I also never made that claim. "Dollars in" doesn't determine the long term success of a business either, because "dollars in" now don't forecast "dollars in" the future, so simply making that connection that "more sales on extras = more beneficial to business long term" is false. My stance isn't based on sales of extras, it is based on long term guest retention. Eventually the pool of new people traveling in runs dry, just a matter of time.

Also as @halfabee pointed out there are quite a few extras, so honestly I wonder at what point the market for extras for someone traveling for a one or two day trip just becomes so saturated that the spending is too thinly split amongst the experiences. Would be interesting to see where that happens.
 
What I said directly in the portion you quoted, when you consider the price tag and the time required (both booking and participating). The pricing of the tours I would consider semi-repeatable are fairly priced around $30 or less per person (Collies, Wolves, Train) with the more expensive ones clearly being one timers (elite VIP, roller coaster tours, etc.). I mean correct me if I am wrong, but have you met a large number of locals who marathon the tours? Sure a lot of people have done them once or maybe twice, but I am confused as to how you think my point does not hold true to these as well. The ones I would assume have been repeated are the cheaper tours, especially when you consider the cost for this is $100 given the minimum guests requirement (of which I have not seen proof of myself, I have just seen others speaking of, and I assume is accurate). As far as the river cruise goes, I see that as an experience with higher repeatability than a show with drinks experience, though that is an entirely separate rant.

Consumer psychology, people are more likely to spend more money on several smaller charges than one large charge. Once someone walks away having dropped the grand total over $100 for them and one other person to have a show and some drinks, the likelihood that they will run it back is extremely slim. But if you charge $15 per drink like they do around HoS, people are more likely to get a drink or two every time they visit, and that adds up fast. Same thing with the tours, especially when you factor in the kid-friendliness of some of the tours and the increase likelihood for people to spend money on experiences for their children.

Even so, the large numbers of tour options backs up my overall claim that the park is targeting the day-long destination trippers more than the locals. The thing up for debate here is if targeting that group is more beneficial to the business long term than targeting locals, yet that is the bit not being talked about.
I think you've missed my point. (Though it seems you then partially changed message in your subsequent post...? I'll address the original post.)

You described locals, as literally "the ideal target audience" for this new bar thing. But they aren't, at all, IMO. They'll go once, maybe. As you point out, they aren't likely to pay extra for it again and again. They are no more ideal as upcharge customers for this speakeasy than they are for the horses/dogs tour.

Yet the horses/dogs tour continues operating. As does the dogs/wolves tour. As do the others, even if we want to put those others in separate categories due to price.

Who is propping up ALL of this upcharge stuff long term? Out of towners. Not locals. And the supply of willing out of towners doesn't seem to ever really dry up for the rest of the upcharge stuff, short of a full-on pandemic. The speakeasy's target audience really isn't much different in that regard.

So... declaring that "it isn't gonna work" because it won't pull many local repeats, as you originally suggested, strikes me as a 50/50 guess at the speakeasy's fate based on the wrong causal inference.

If your point, as in your more recent post, was just that the park should have provided a nice drop-in bar experience for locals to easily and incrementally spend their money while also enticing those visiting from far away, that makes sense -- but it isn't the same as predicting the speakeasy "isn't gonna work" because locals are "the ideal target audience." Those are two different points, and I disagree with the former, even while I agree that the latter sounds like a good experience. It sounds so good, in fact, that it sounds more or less exactly like the existing experience in the back of the Festhaus. ...Save for the location, which would be so much more accessible for everyone if the train stopped right at the back door of the place where the terrain is pretty damned flat. I will die on this hill, or rather on this level terrain.

One other thing I think we agree on: the speakeasy is probably much closer to being merely kid-compatible than actually kid-engaging (pending the truth about whatever it is that happens inside the place while the kid sits there with a flight of "mocktails"), whereas the tours generally do a better job with getting kids excited to see horses and wolves and such.

Families, wherever they're from, so often will choose to pay for an experience because it's something to do specifically with the kids, which typically means for the kids. It gets weird quickly, frequently making kid-oriented vacation spending irrational IMO. I say this as an oft-irrational multi-child parent myself. It seems to me that the speakeasy won't benefit much from that spending effect, whereas pretty much all of the tours do. Bringing your kid(s) to the speakeasy is more an obligation ("C'mon honey, he'll do fine in there for an hour") than a family opportunity/spending driver. Totally agree there.

Of course, the other main fundamental risk I see with the speakeasy has been beaten to death already by others: it may just be a medium experience. But that's all crystal-ball stuff for now. As the vacuous truism says: "It could work, if they do it right."
 
You described locals, as literally "the ideal target audience" for this new bar thing. But they aren't, at all, IMO. They'll go once, maybe. As you point out, they aren't likely to pay extra for it again and again. They are no more ideal as upcharge customers for this speakeasy than they are for the horses/dogs tour.
Flip it, I pointed out this bar thing being the perfect opportunity to appeal to locals if done properly. In fact, my entire argument has been that locals aren't the target audience with how they executed the bar thing, when they should've been with a different execution of the concept.

Yet the horses/dogs tour continues operating. As does the dogs/wolves tour. As do the others, even if we want to put those others in separate categories due to price.

Who is propping up ALL of this upcharge stuff long term? Out of towners. Not locals. And the supply of willing out of towners doesn't seem to ever really dry up for the rest of the upcharge stuff, short of a full-on pandemic. The speakeasy's target audience really isn't much different in that regard.
These also have WAY lower overhead than this speakeasy thing, as speakeasy needs facility maintenance, staffing, and goods purchased to run it. The margins on this are slimmer than that for the animal tours (since they are paying these people anyway to be at the park), so I see it as being run stricter on when they may cut it if the money in isn't what they want it to be. Combine that with my estimated low guest retention the next 5 years, things across the board will see fewer people.


In general, I think you are confusing me saying "ideal target audience" as the current bar's ideal audience, when clearly as they have set it up the locals aren't that audience. I think it SHOULD'VE been set up with them as the target audience, I am saying the park overall has an "ideal target audience" to appeal to right now in the locals since they are getting hurt the most by recent decisions, and here is yet another example of them failing to recognize the audience they should be giving attention to in order to invest in long term guest retention. Hell, travel in general is projected to continue to decline as well as the market health, locals are the safe bet across the board.

We are literally agreeing. I am saying this concept does not appeal to locals at all, as we agree upon. I am going beyond that and predicting this will be a failure because they didn't appeal to the locals with this concept due to it being a more volatile form of upcharge extra.
 
Save for the location, which would be so much more accessible for everyone if the train stopped right at the back door of the place where the terrain is pretty damned flat. I will die on this hill, or rather on this level terrain.


I'm confused - are there really any major noticable grade differences between Caribou and Das Festhaus?

Edit: I don't disagree that a decent bar next to a train station is a good idea, but I don't see a reason to stop there for an existing bar (unless they were to make it the nexus of transport to the future FHP attractions).
 
I'm confused - are there really any major noticable grade differences between Caribou and Das Festhaus?

Edit: I don't disagree that a decent bar next to a train station is a good idea, but I don't see a reason to stop there for an existing bar (unless they were to make it the nexus of transport to the future FHP attractions).
My obstinate insistence, based on “lookin’ at it real good,” is that the track stretch immediately behind the Festhaus is indeed no less level than Caribou, nor is the elevation change between them particularly significant, and that a station behind Festhaus, marked and accessible from the picnic area — or, get this, via a slightly longer path from just inside the newly guest-accessible Festhaus Field area — see how I just made that whole area suddenly more useful and less remote? — would be a great portal to everything in Oktoberfest including Festhaus, Spire/the theorized boneyard ride I’ll henceforth call Bonecoaster, and of course the bar.

The stretch of track from the Rhine bridge to the Oktoberfest train crossing in Festhaus Park, and somewhat beyond it, by contrast is collectively said around here to be untenable due to grade. I completely believe that does NOT apply if the theoretical station is actually tucked behind the building.

Am I right? How should I know? Huh?!? But I think I am, dammit.

Also: Festhaus to Caribou is about the same track distance as Heatherdowns to Festa, and saves a good amount of walking along varying grades on a hot day. It is also a better way for people entering BGW just before lunch or dinner, or anyone else near the front of the park, to efficiently reach its premier eatery more directly. For families with small kids, people with disabilities or age related mobility limits, really just for everyone else as well… I plan to be annoying about how good this would be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mamunia
To totally derail the thread:

I was more asking what the issue was in walking from Caribou to Das Festhaus - it's maybe 5 minutes, in which you can get thirstier for your desired beverage. There's some slight grade differences to get there, but nothing strenuous to most people.

Otherwise, I'm not against a station for FHP though there's a lot of pros/cons already floating in the railroad and concepts threads.
 
To totally derail the thread:

I was more asking what the issue was in walking from Caribou to Das Festhaus - it's maybe 5 minutes, in which you can get thirstier for your desired beverage. There's some slight grade differences to get there, but nothing strenuous to most people.

Otherwise, I'm not against a station for FHP though there's a lot of pros/cons already floating in the railroad and concepts threads.
Haha, derail.
 
To totally derail the thread:

I was more asking what the issue was in walking from Caribou to Das Festhaus - it's maybe 5 minutes, in which you can get thirstier for your desired beverage. There's some slight grade differences to get there, but nothing strenuous to most people.

Otherwise, I'm not against a station for FHP though there's a lot of pros/cons already floating in the railroad and concepts threads.
As stated over there in that thread, they would need to regrade the physical tracks to allow for a stopping point there.
 
As stated over there in that thread, they would need to regrade the physical tracks to allow for a stopping point there.

Yep, that sort of problem was what I was alluding to being a con in the other threads. Still not sure what's wrong walking otherwise?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad