Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
Except they aren't competing with the Disney/Universal's of the world. Size wise they are behind SF/CF. They are very likely outsourcing it. The company I work for is roughly (staffing wise completely) the same size as SEAS (shockingly) and aside from intellectual property, we have all our IT outsourced.
SEAS most certainly competes with Disney/Universal in both Florida and Southern California. The days that guests spend at Disney and Universal parks are days they aren't spending at SEAS parks, though it's not entirely a zero sum game. If Disney had built a park in Northern VA, that would have had a huge impact on BGW's market base. Being smaller doesn't change the reality of the competitive landscape.
 
In my experience so far, lots of companies choose to outsource what they consider not a core business focus.

If you're an amusement park company, you're more focused on attract/satisfy/retain in addition to the P&L statement than you are on managing data infrastructure (regardless if it's in the cloud or not).

Why spend all the time, money, and effort on finding the right people, then ramp up their capacities to meet your needs when there's plenty of vendors you can contract with more or less turnkey solutions for the same?
It makes sense for SEAS to outsource some IT that is not part of their core business such as accounting, payroll, HR, etc. The amusement park part of their business is the core of their business and the digital part of that experience can be a competitive advantage/disadvantage between parks. Simply outsourcing that part of your IT means you give up all capability to differentiate with competitors, and SEAS has serious competitors in their markets.
 
It makes sense for SEAS to outsource some IT that is not part of their core business such as accounting, payroll, HR, etc. The amusement park part of their business is the core of their business and the digital part of that experience can be a competitive advantage/disadvantage between parks. Simply outsourcing that part of your IT means you give up all capability to differentiate with competitors, and SEAS has serious competitors in their markets.

I agree that the company could be at a disadvantage, however it really depends on how their vendor agreements are structured. SEAS still has to give the vendor some direction on what they want, the question is how much leeway does the vendor have.

For the pass purchasing systems, that could be wholly the vendor's modules sitting on top of the park websites. When you think about it, it's not too uncommon to get a specialist vendor for payment systems vs building in-house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenWilkerson
Ok, it appears no one knows whether the ticket/pass holder software is inhouse or not. So just a lot of conjecture here. However, the bottom line (whether it's inhouse or not) it's still SEAS responsibility to make sure it works as they intended.

To me, what we're seeing is one of two things - (1) they haven't decided how to handle it or (2) they have decided to run it as is (for cash flow) and will figure out something later. Either way, yet another failing by the Marketing/PR Department in effectively communicating to it's core customers.
 
Ok, it appears no one knows whether the ticket/pass holder software is inhouse or not. So just a lot of conjecture here. However, the bottom line (whether it's inhouse or not) it's still SEAS responsibility to make sure it works as they intended.

To me, what we're seeing is one of two things - (1) they haven't decided how to handle it or (2) they have decided to run it as is (for cash flow) and will figure out something later. Either way, yet another failing by the Marketing/PR Department in effectively communicating to it's core customers.
If it's outsourced it's only licensed software operated and serviced by internal teams, pretty sure.

Part of the problems SEAS IT has (e.g. when your redemption don't work when trying to buy food) is because the multiple internal software and databases don't have enough staff to support them properly.
 
Just speculation at this point but hypothetically, let's say they don't open this season. It would be interesting to see and know how they plan to address members with the dining plan and stein club. We've already seen they don't have a good plan for the EZ pay passes. I'm already out about 6 or 7 weeks of the dining plan and stein club membership. Not even figuring the pass lost money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mamunia
I am going to assume that you won’t be denied of anything that you have paid for. If they are charging people for a season of dining/stein and only give two months, they would have lawsuits all over the place. I’m sure that everyone will be compensated fairly in the end. There’s just no reason to think they are out to steal everyone’s money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: warfelg
I am going to assume that you won’t be denied of anything that you have paid for. If they are charging people for a season of dining/stein and only give two months, they would have lawsuits all over the place. I’m sure that everyone will be compensated fairly in the end. There’s just no reason to think they are out to steal everyone’s money.

I would also say that while it’s frustrating from an customer POV there is so much more as a company that they are worried about like staying open, funding animal care, what the quick passing bills mean for them, as well as the state guidelines. That’s not including what are operations going to look like when they can reopen, what that means financially, and what that means for staffing. While it sucks to hear the customers being taken care OC isn’t the first thing they did, I think in these times we should be somewhat understanding. Especially since most of our employers are likely doing the exact same thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJTLG
You’re right. There are much more important things for them to worry about right now. But honestly, that’s no excuse to keep taking peoples money without an explanation of how that will benefit them later. I cannot approve of how the park is handling this situation, but also can’t help feeling like it will all work out just fine for everyone.
 
You’re right. There are much more important things for them to worry about right now. But honestly, that’s no excuse to keep taking peoples money without an explanation of how that will benefit them later. I cannot approve of how the park is handling this situation, but also can’t help feeling like it will all work out just fine for everyone.
@MAZ You're the one that's right. IMHO the most important thing they need to be doing to addressing the issues of their core customers. Yes, they have a lot on the table. But all the plans will be moot if they alienate their bread and butter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mamunia
I don’t see this as a one person is right and the other is wrong. There’s quite a bit going on and it massively changes daily or weekly. Who knows in 2 weeks they might have to call off the season and just return everyone’s payments for the year. Maybe they open on 2 weeks in some capacity and just expands everyone’s pass is extended by 2 months in 2021. Who knows.
 
That's the problem in a nutshell @warfelg ...as far as their customers go..."who knows?"

I didn’t say it’s not a problem. Just acknowledging that there’s a lot of unknown for quite a few businesses and things like how to extend add ones that’s likely not a huge percent of the memberships or just how to extend the memberships in general.
 
I'm glad that KD and all of Cedar Fair figured it out so fast and actually communicated to guests what they were doing. And it's applied automatically. That's how you show your guests they are the core of what you're doing.


I didn’t say it’s not a problem. Just acknowledging that there’s a lot of unknown for quite a few businesses and things like how to extend add ones that’s likely not a huge percent of the memberships or just how to extend the memberships in general.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rswashdc
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad