Excavator’s Taters

[warfelg]

The issue is reliable brand name vs unknown restaurant.

I like Excavators 100% more than Boardwalk, but when people see Boardwalk they know what they would get, what’s on the menu, how it’s going to taste.

 

[Crunchewy]

Boardwalk fries are very average. Especially when compared to Thrasher's which are the real boardwalk fries.

 

[Zachary]

The issue is reliable brand name vs unknown restaurant.

I like Excavators 100% more than Boardwalk, but when people see Boardwalk they know what they would get, what’s on the menu, how it’s going to taste.

Which is precisely why Boardwalk Fries (and all other chains in any competition with good park offerings) must be wholly eviscerated.

 

[warfelg]

Which is precisely why Boardwalk Fries (and all other chains in any competition with good park offerings) must be wholly eviscerated.

Agreed. I would suspect that money and greed is at the root of those decisions.

 

[SLC Headache]

Regarding chain fries in Cedar Fair parks, Boardwalk < Chickie's and Pete's.

 

[bwick29]

Agree entirely. I love Chickie's and Pete's and eat there every time I can. IMHO it goes Excavator's > C's & P's > Boardwalk > Everything else.

That said, I know the crab fries don't have crab (stupid name) and the dining plan only works for a slice of white bread and a gently used piece of bubble gum so I'm not surprised like most negative reviewers were.

 

[Jonesta6]

Agreed. I would suspect that money and greed is at the root of those decisions.

Perhaps, though I suspect it's a contract issue.

Not privy to it, of course, but it could be that the park signed some kind of agreement that those stands have to exist through a certain date or they have to pay a hefty amount to buy out the end of the contract.

If that's even remotely close to the issue, then good chance it's easier for the park to keep the stands open and take a cut of the revenue until the contract expires.

 

[warfelg]

Perhaps, though I suspect it's a contract issue.

Not privy to it, of course, but it could be that the park signed some kind of agreement that those stands have to exist through a certain date or they have to pay a hefty amount to buy out the end of the contract.

If that's even remotely close to the issue, then good chance it's easier for the park to keep the stands open and take a cut of the revenue until the contract expires.

So….money and greed?

 

[Jonesta6]

So….money and greed?

I think it's the question of greed - money is kind of an obvious assuming the contract scenario I laid out is true to some extent.

From the Boardwalk Fries brand, they're simply protecting their interest. Why sign an agreement with a theme park if you can't guarantee they're going to continue selling your product in branded locations on their premisses through the length of the contract? It could happen, but then the deal wouldn't necessarily be all that valuable... So why commit to it?

From the park side, they're also protecting their interest. They made an agreement to keep selling Boardwalk Fries at branded locations for whatever share of revenue while paying whatever costs/fees associated. While they could simply shut down these locations in favor of forcing guests to go to their own in-house food locations, it's highly likely that it's much cheaper to not do that and continue selling Boardwalk Fries through the length of the contract. Even though we can see parks being profitable, they don't get that way by throwing away relatively easily earned revenue streams (though we're talking fairly small revenues for some spud shops compared to the larger picture).

However, the moment that contract ends and assuming they don't renegotiate for another, they're free to abandon the Boardwalk Fries locations and only sell their own without any financial penalties to do so.

Basically the same thing as a franchisee to chain owner relationship.

 

[Mushroom]

So….money and greed?

Define “greed.” Is the goal of every park owned by a publicly traded corporation not to maximize long-term profit? If so, where do we draw the line between “money” and “greed”? I feel like the world “greed” is often thrown around as a buzzword to criticize any profit-motivated decision (not saying that’s necessarily what you’re doing @warfelg) so I think it’s important to distinguish our definitions.

Given that everything corporate parks do is motivated by long-term profitability, every investment could be considered “greed” since the end goal is the same: more money. Investing in theming, rides, and better food is just as “greedy” as things like adding in chain restaurants, because they’re all done with the end goal of making more money. Is it only “greed” when they do things we don’t agree with?

There are exceptions, of course. I’d consider the United Parks 5% surcharge “greed” because it relies more on trickery and surreptiousness to rake in more profit without giving the consumer a truly fair stake in the process.

But in general, knowing that corporate theme parks only exist to maximize profit, I don’t like to blame them for being greedy. I’m more apt to criticize them when I believe they’ve made boneheaded, short-sighted decisions that both diminish the guest experience and therefore will lead to poorer long-term returns for the park. But that’s not greed, it’s bad business.

 

[warfelg]

I used greed as a buzzword that many others have (without being called out).

End of the day the decision is a money driven one like every other decision a business makes. Which is greed on the stakeholders end IMO.

 

[Mushroom]

I used greed as a buzzword that many others have (without being called out).

End of the day the decision is a money driven one like every other decision a business makes. Which is greed on the stakeholders end IMO.

Sounds like you agree with me? If you accept the premise that every decision a business makes is driven by money, calling it “greedy” becomes essentially meaningless.

To quote Adam Smith: “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”

 

[warfelg]

I still disagree but to avoid a bunch of meaningless back and forth let’s just say we do.

 

[warfelg]

I think it's the question of greed - money is kind of an obvious assuming the contract scenario I laid out is true to some extent.

From the Boardwalk Fries brand, they're simply protecting their interest. Why sign an agreement with a theme park if you can't guarantee they're going to continue selling your product in branded locations on their premisses through the length of the contract? It could happen, but then the deal wouldn't necessarily be all that valuable... So why commit to it?

I apologize @Jonesta6 that I didn't give you a full thought response since I was in the midst of wedding planning, getting a lot of things bride-splained to me and felt like that's what your post did to my comment.

I say money and greed because this is a decision based in someone along the line (Boardwalk Fries or Excavators/KD) putting their profit interest above all else. From this aspect of Boardwalk Fries and protecting their product and not wanting other product on premise - without knowing what's in their contract what made KD think they could build Excavator's Taters then? Presumably both companies involved have teams of lawyers that pour over every word in that contract. So would we then say BF was forgetful in not putting in language that prevented CF/KD from doing this? Or was it in there and KD breached contract by building this anyways? I could take it further and if you are Boardwalk Fries and you really wanted to protect your brand why not make it that KD can only use BF across the park as a whole?

From the park side, they're also protecting their interest. They made an agreement to keep selling Boardwalk Fries at branded locations for whatever share of revenue while paying whatever costs/fees associated. While they could simply shut down these locations in favor of forcing guests to go to their own in-house food locations, it's highly likely that it's much cheaper to not do that and continue selling Boardwalk Fries through the length of the contract. Even though we can see parks being profitable, they don't get that way by throwing away relatively easily earned revenue streams (though we're talking fairly small revenues for some spud shops compared to the larger picture).

From the park side - without seeing the contract we don't know what we can assume there. Maybe it's something like BF's operates as it's own entity within KD and just basically pay a lease with a really small profit sharing (IIRC that's what Hershey does).

But I'll toss this one at you: The park also isn't protecting their interest by allowing BF's to operate in favor of Excavator's Taters. IMO Excavator's is lightyears ahead of Boardwalk Fries in terms of quality. While BF is a known brand, if they aren't putting out a quality product than all KD is caring about at the end of the day isn't their interest of quality product drives more spending, but guaranteed money regardless of quality means more to them, which to me is where the greed part comes from.

Frankly, I take issue that the better product is taken away from me (and IIRC isn't ET more expensive than BF's anyways?) and if I want fries I either have to get them as a meal or get them from Boardwalk Fries. Which, by the way, I can't eat because I'm highly allergic to peanut oil. So it's a double whammy to me. Last time I asked (2022), ET's doesn't use peanut oil (ditto for most of KD's own fried food options) so I can get their fries.
Now I know most people aren't thinking of those things regularly, but given I get my day completely derailed (I don't go into anaphylactic shock but I can't keep on my normal day due to hives) when I eat something with peanut oil I'm really sensitive about knowing who uses it. For example I studied Chick-Fil-A's menu to know what is fried and isn't since they use peanut oil. Five Guys is another place I avoid because of this.

However, the moment that contract ends and assuming they don't renegotiate for another, they're free to abandon the Boardwalk Fries locations and only sell their own without any financial penalties to do so.

Basically the same thing as a franchisee to chain owner relationship.

This las agreement takes me back to the earlier point then of one side wasn't careful enough with the contract when these things were built out.

Again, I call it greed because end of the day that contract and money (by one side) drives why Boardwalk Fries is open as opposed to Excavator's Taters not because it's the right decision of Boardwalk being empirically a better product or they have their own better product elsewhere.

 

[Jonesta6]

The park also isn't protecting their interest by allowing BF's to operate in favor of Excavator's Taters. IMO Excavator's is lightyears ahead of Boardwalk Fries in terms of quality. While BF is a known brand, if they aren't putting out a quality product than all KD is caring about at the end of the day isn't their interest of quality product drives more spending, but guaranteed money regardless of quality means more to them, which to me is where the greed part comes from.

I see where you're coming from and empathize on the bride-splaining, so just to point out this entire conversation is the product of us being nerds about the minutia of the theme park business so I know I'm not taking it too seriously.

That written...

I think you have two issues with Excavator Taters that may eventually see resolution but not now: multiple locations in the park, and brand recognition.

Considering the park is only a few years of wading into serious culinary upgrades, I have a feeling they have an issue with getting guests to try eating at the park-branded food locations after a precedence has been set that it's not that worth it for regular guests. Therefore, while the quality for the price may be way better at ET, most guests are already familiar with BF and as long as they're cooked long enough it's hard to screw up grab and go french fries.

Again, without knowing what's in the contract, I'm guessing there wasn't any thought when it was signed as to the park creating a dedicated fries shop - for all we know, there might have been an exclusivity clause where all restaurants serving fries had to be BF stock, however I don't think that was ever the case judging from the variance of spuds I've had over the years.

Thus my guess is the park is testing the waters with ET while serving out the remainder of the contract or working towards having enough data to make a decision to renegotiate or cancel assuming there isn't too high a penalty for that.

Once the BF agreement ends, then the ET concept could be easily expanded with either new shop locations (preferably with thematically appropriate names) or taking over and rebranding the BF kiosks. I just don't see them having a reason to go through all that trouble now if they're leaving enough money on the table or losing in the existing deal.

 

[warfelg]

I think you have two issues with Excavator Taters that may eventually see resolution but not now: multiple locations in the park, and brand recognition.

Right, which I said at the start before the other part that put into this part of the conversation.

Again, without knowing what's in the contract, I'm guessing there wasn't any thought when it was signed as to the park creating a dedicated fries shop - for all we know, there might have been an exclusivity clause where all restaurants serving fries had to be BF stock, however I don't think that was ever the case judging from the variance of spuds I've had over the years.

Which is why I brought up the point then - if there was anything excluding this in the contract how did ET get approved in the first place? Or did BF's not put any exclusivity in the contract at all and now they bring up issue that it's happened.

Thus my guess is the park is testing the waters with ET while serving out the remainder of the contract or working towards having enough data to make a decision to renegotiate or cancel assuming there isn't too high a penalty for that.

Then test some of it as a limited engagement menu item in another restaurant location rather than building a designed space for a concept that they might not know if there's an issue with it.

Like you're right, we don't know what the contract looks like. For all we know the BF's employees can be BF fries employees and not KD employees, and there might not be any exclusive french fry restaurant clause and KD is purely closing this because they don't want to spend the money to operate ET's when there's a BF's in the park giving them money without KD having to do anything to operate it.

I feel like there's a common 'culture' of calling everything bad 'greed' and I fell into it because I'm usually on the thought of businesses are going to do what's best for business, and you can call it what you want. I can't help but feel like there's unspoken rules around all of this when it's ok to call something this or that and when it isn't.

I dunno. It's not worth continually going back and forth on because at the end of the day I'm not changing my opinion on this. Profits and making money at the end of the day (aka greed) are what's driving this decision and all these parks operate the same on the back end at the the end of the day.

 

[Mushroom]

Like you're right, we don't know what the contract looks like. For all we know the BF's employees can be BF fries employees and not KD employees, and there might not be any exclusive french fry restaurant clause and KD is purely closing this because they don't want to spend the money to operate ET's when there's a BF's in the park giving them money without KD having to do anything to operate it.

This is the correct answer. Boardwalk Fries hires and staffs its own employees separate from KD. Whether Boardwalk Fries locations are open is completely independent of whether Excavators Tators (or any other park eatery for that matter) is open, and vice versa.

 

[warfelg]

This is the correct answer. Boardwalk Fries hires and staffs its own employees separate from KD. Whether Boardwalk Fries locations are open is completely independent of whether Excavators Tators (or any other park eatery for that matter) is open, and vice versa.

Appreciate the clarification on that point. Makes the whole situation more frustrating to me. As much as I hate that Hersheypark let chains infiltrate their F&B program at least when they still try to take things on they are doing something different then.

End of the day Excavator's Taters being closed as much as frequent as it is tends to be a major letdown. Many people prefer it, and as I stated in another post I can't do Boardwalk to to the oil used. I haven't tried Outpost, I honestly keep forgetting it's there. But when I get back there and Chicken Shack and Jungle Market are the only two open, I tend to head back to CAG.

OT - but Jungle Market's burger that I had back in 2017 was one of the single worst food items I've ever had in a park and the employee was very rude about my complaint and is the source of my issue with KD. The burger was so dry and basically a hockey puck, the bun was hardened, and when I asked for a cheese burger they just grabbed one of the standard hamburgers from the back corner of the heater and slapped cheese on it. Just to cover this part - it was only 1:35pm so it's not like it was end of day. When I sat down to eat it and discovered it wasn't good, the employee said that it was "too late" because I already paid and would need to buy another one. On my way out I stopped by guest services to let them know about my displeasure and they just gave me a coupon for a free meal - without looking to notice I had a meal plan and that wasn't really useful for me.

I know that's not everyone's experience but it's what really got me annoyed with KD because I had that issue at Dorney and Cedar Point so Cedar Fair has lost some faith for me.

 

[Jonesta6]

I dunno. It's not worth continually going back and forth on because at the end of the day I'm not changing my opinion on this. Profits and making money at the end of the day (aka greed) are what's driving this decision and all these parks operate the same on the back end at the the end of the day.

Perhaps it's better discussed in the General Discussion thread, but maybe we can think of what constitutes healthy profits vs. price gouging

This is the correct answer. Boardwalk Fries hires and staffs its own employees separate from KD. Whether Boardwalk Fries locations are open is completely independent of whether Excavators Tators (or any other park eatery for that matter) is open, and vice versa.

Thanks for the clarification - assuming this is said from experience.

 

[guy305]