Personally, they should move the whole thing to the empty parcel adjacent to Water County. Make it a stand alone park. Then the FOF could be completely retooled into something more inline with the Old Country.
Sesame Place Williamsburg
- Thread starter Snel987
- Start date
horsesboy said:
Yes, I discussed that in the article I just posted and linked above.
Celticdog said:
For this to happen at all, it needs to be financially viable. That probably means taking advantage of as much existing infrastructure and many established attractions as possible. A huge overhaul like isn’t likely to be cost-effective.
So i had an idea after going to the park today. How about turning England in to the normal preferred lot and then creating a new premiere member lot. This could be done by building a garage in the employee lot and having a section for premiere members. Those members could then enter the park via a special premiere entrance near the clinic. This would assist the parking situation and also provide an awesome perk for premiere members.
WDWRLD said:
So I wanted to address this but I was away from my computer and writing from the phone isn't easy.
As for the HOS and effecting this stuff:
(1) If BGW decides that they won't do SP because of an 8-10 week a year operation that isn't even open every day of the week, they are making a big mistake.
(2) I personally don't have kids, but I have enough friends/families with kids. If the parents are ignoring those warnings that it's not a great environment for kids, that's not the parks fault. That's on the parents. Some go at night because they likely have a range of kids ages. My one cousin's oldest kid is 14, youngest is 5.
(3) Having a SP would allow for a kid friendly HOS to happen at the same time as the main parks HOS. Now that family with the range of kids could allow the older with some friends to go into the main park and the younger one to be in a kid friendly area. Maybe the parents take shifts. Maybe they go with other adult friends and take turns which parents stay with the younger kids.
But broader scope, this is a good idea. Given as some said that they do keep some kiddie rides in the BGW. It can allow the park to get back to the "Old Country" feel and charm, without having to abandon something that is successful for kids. The character meet and greet is awesome, and it's something very popular with kids these days.
I saw someone bring up about adults thinking that maybe this is a real water park in the back section. I used to live about 1.5 hours from the Philly Sesame Place, and that was never an issue. The commercials for it up there always featured kids (like 4-8) and showed very little of the water rides. They always showed the water portion as like an "added bonus" as opposed to "big feature" (despite about half the things to do being water related). It's all in how you advertise it. If they make it all about the characters, immersion, and rides, and show the water as an added benefit; the likelyhood of parents overrunning the area is low.
Overall I think a 3rd gate SP in Williamsburg is a win-win-win. BGW now becomes a multi-day visit for families. Means more people through their gates (going to be hard to do both parks in the same day unless you split up), more people spending money in their parks. Williamsburg/JCC get more tourists coming through, meaning more hotel stays, restaurants get more visits, the outlets get more business. Heck maybe even the historical venues see an uptick. And lastly, BGW can see more out of the area planned visits with bundle packages. Before UO had hotels on site, they partnered with local hotels and did things like a 3 night 4 day visit, $225 a night, but your ticket was included, saving you money. BGW being able to partner with 5-6 local chain hotels and offering something similar where the ticket and hotel are slightly discounted if you bundle together would be awesome. Then on top of that, they could have free shuttle services, lowering the stress on parking.
Completely unrelated to that, but somewhat related:
BGW should offer an "Uber dropoff" point. That way if you are staying at a hotel, you could Uber to and from the park, that way if you don't want to be limited in where to go to the park from, or where you want to go after the park, but you still don't have to take a car.
I think it's a nice concept but, as others have mentioned, it could be a logistical challenge to make it happen.
They have to be able to address parking. Structures run about $15k to $18k a space (googled it, so might be off a few K either way). If they utilize the across RT 60 parking lots daily, they might have to consider an overpass as now they have to pay JCC to direct traffic. How will they route trams to remaining on-site parking via the existing overpass to keep them from mingling with vehicular traffic? How do delivery, emergency and employee tram vehicles access England back of house?
You also have to assume they've addressed getting more power from Dominion. They use a lot of temporary generators for Christmastown. Of course, this might have been addressed in their proposals for "Madrid".
So, if they decide to run with this, it'll be interesting how they put it all together.
They have to be able to address parking. Structures run about $15k to $18k a space (googled it, so might be off a few K either way). If they utilize the across RT 60 parking lots daily, they might have to consider an overpass as now they have to pay JCC to direct traffic. How will they route trams to remaining on-site parking via the existing overpass to keep them from mingling with vehicular traffic? How do delivery, emergency and employee tram vehicles access England back of house?
You also have to assume they've addressed getting more power from Dominion. They use a lot of temporary generators for Christmastown. Of course, this might have been addressed in their proposals for "Madrid".
So, if they decide to run with this, it'll be interesting how they put it all together.
warfelg said:
1 I never said they shouldnt do SP because of HOS, I was only referring to other comments of them giving parents a choice for a more kid friendly halloween option allowing BGW to make HOS more intense. Please stop twisting my comments.
2 Again...I never said it was the parks fault.
3 Like you said, a family with a range of kids could allow the older to go with some friends into the main park. Does Seaworld Parks have a minimum age requirement to enter the park alone? I know Disney its 14, so if SP and BGW are separate parks then would they be old enough to be in the other park alone or with other same age friends. It also brings up behavior issues. Look at how some school and band groups act when they are unsupervised. They run wild, do we really want more teens running wild and acting up just because the parents are over in SP?
My point being, making SP a separate gate to me makes no sense. Just include it in BGW. This feels like a money grab to me, they will build it then include it in the Membership which will raise the membership price even thought many would have zero interest in SP. Then the free preschool pass could only work for SP, so then those parents would have to start paying for a pass for that kid to BGW. Putting all the kids attractions in one spot is a mistake, sprinkle them throughout the park so everyone has a good mix of fun things to do as a family. The way it is now works great, older kids ride Lochness while younger can ride the mini horses right next door, older kids ride Verbolten and younger kids can ride the airplanes.
I think you are creating a false dichotomy.
As I mentioned in my article, there is no reason to believe that LotD or any of the children's ride located in the other hamlets would be removed, if Sesame Place Williamsburg is created. So, BGW would still have (possibly refurbished?) children's attractions. There would, however, also be a full park dedicated to families with small children, which seems to be a growing market across the industry.
I also see the third gate as a possible to solution to the HOS and CT problems.
As for teenagers roaming at BGW alone, that already happens. In fact, I recall going with my friends to the park alone decades ago. I don't think the introduction of a children's park next door is going create that issue; it currently exists.
As I mentioned in my article, there is no reason to believe that LotD or any of the children's ride located in the other hamlets would be removed, if Sesame Place Williamsburg is created. So, BGW would still have (possibly refurbished?) children's attractions. There would, however, also be a full park dedicated to families with small children, which seems to be a growing market across the industry.
I also see the third gate as a possible to solution to the HOS and CT problems.
As for teenagers roaming at BGW alone, that already happens. In fact, I recall going with my friends to the park alone decades ago. I don't think the introduction of a children's park next door is going create that issue; it currently exists.
Sesame place would never be a preschool pass park. That's their target market. The current sesame place is the only park in the chain that is only free under 2, the rest are under 3.
But if they do the preschool pass there has to be a paying adult to take them...if people think they are getting something for free they lose sight of paying for the other pass because of the word "Free". Thats the reason now behind the preschool pass at BGW. Then the mother buys a BGW park pass to take the toddler for something to do during the week, so then the dad hearing how much fun they had has a free day on the weekend and decides he wants to go. Next thing you know they have sold two Season Passes or Memberships of of that free preschool pass.
Great articles Nicole and Zachary! I never thought really about how shifting focus to association with sesame place could really be a benefit to move the SEAS company away from the Blackfish issues and into a family friendly light. That is a really smart move on their part. The blackfish scandal made sure everyone seen what others considered negative about SEAS. Now they(SEAS) can use this as a way to show that there is much more to the company than what the public think they know. (sorry if that is worded awkwardly)Nicole said:
Now i will say this while it makes sense in some instances, people like myself would be affected probably more so because of our daughter. Please let me expand on this a moment for my family specifically we travel 4+ hours to BGW and normally stay a long weekend to enjoy the park as much as we can. Making this a separate entity would cause us to either put out money for another trip, (which in most cases we cant do) or severely limit our time at BGW, to make sure my daughter can enjoy herself completely too. Which means while i love BGW it will take a little longer for her to be able to be introduced to it. Being 3 but tall affords her some leniency (but not enough for some kiddie rides lol). I just hope whatever happens the park is made better for it. We all deserve BGW to be the best it can be.
Nicole said:
Like every spring weekend with a music in the park festival?
I remember being 12-14. Loved rides. My parents couldn’t stand them. I have been dropped off at HP, CP, Dorney, SFGA alone. It’s going to happen and there’s little way to stop it.
WDWRLD said:
I think they do it for the other way around. I’m sure someone can ask actual marketing, but having that pass makes it more likely with the family that has a kid 3 and under to buy passes if they don’t have to buy one for a family member too small and or too young to ride anything.
Maybe im just thinking about it all wrong, but I think taking part of of the BGW park and running a fence through it, adding a few more rides and calling it a 3rd gate is all around a bad idea. Now if it was built on the other side of RT 60 and the train tracks or down the road a mile or two I think it would be a great idea. I just think smashing it that location wont be good for either park. I actually think if it was placed next to WCUSA it would be a better fit. I really dont see it having any affect on CT and doubt it would even be open even if it was right next to BGW. I also think that the shared services that have been mentioned will be a problem for accounting and management. Each park will need to show expenses and profits and if they are walking next door to get things from BGW it will make things confusing. I know BGW uses some WCUSA staff at times but not sure how they work that out. I also dont think you will see the SS characters leaving BGW. The show in the Globe theater, where would they do that? And things like the train, I think that you would see an increased presence mentioning the SS park as the train goes past. And not that I think it would happen but what if they put the skyride inside the fence for SS park and do like Universal for Harry Potter, if you want to ride that you will need the park to park ticket. I think a 3 gate for SS would work, but it needs to be away from BGW, and if they based it off SP in Pennsylvania with similar rides or Legolanad in Florida it would draw even older visitors. In the long run I think what has happened they have entered an agreement and not are trying to figure out the cheapest way they can meet that agreement.
So intersting little tidbit that probably means nothing but the name badges on BGW employees have been changed and are now in the shape of the sesame street logo. Again it probably means nothing but I noticed it today and thought I would mention it in light of everything else.
WDWRLD said:
Which is exactly what the park wants. Bringing the kid along means more people coming through the gate. More little things to buy, more food to buy.
I'm not sure if you have kids or not, but my friends have kids, 3 and 4. They came to town for a visit. Their dad, my friend, loves parks as much as I do; their mom enjoys parks. We were talking about what to do, and they were iffy on BGW because of their kids being young. Told them about the preschool pass and suddenly they were all about it.
Long run: They gain more from pre-school passes than lose. SPW would be a way to gain even more on that.
I think a question that needs to be answered is how the addition of this Sesame Place Williamsburg would impact attendance at Busch Gardens. As Nicole pointed out in her article, child-oriented parks such as LEGOLAND have been successful, but a distinction needs to be made that these parks are standalone and don't back up to a pre-existing family/adult-oriented park next door.
As far as I know, there's no existing barometer as to how building a new separately-gated children's park would perform. Would families who are primarily visiting for their children spend the same amount of time and money at Sesame Place as they would at Busch Gardens? Would the drop in Busch Gardens' attendance as it loses guests with young children to the new park be outweighed by the new benefits? I'm not saying the two-park system wouldn't work, but it has never been proven before.
In defense of the idea, Kings Dominion has been making great strides to cement themselves as the region's premier child-oriented theme park destination with their continued investments in their "world's largest" Planet Snoopy area. An entire park devoted to children would give SEAS a tremendous marketing edge against the folks in Doswell that might convince families to bring their wallets to Williamsburg instead.
As far as I know, there's no existing barometer as to how building a new separately-gated children's park would perform. Would families who are primarily visiting for their children spend the same amount of time and money at Sesame Place as they would at Busch Gardens? Would the drop in Busch Gardens' attendance as it loses guests with young children to the new park be outweighed by the new benefits? I'm not saying the two-park system wouldn't work, but it has never been proven before.
In defense of the idea, Kings Dominion has been making great strides to cement themselves as the region's premier child-oriented theme park destination with their continued investments in their "world's largest" Planet Snoopy area. An entire park devoted to children would give SEAS a tremendous marketing edge against the folks in Doswell that might convince families to bring their wallets to Williamsburg instead.
Joe said:
This leads into another really interesting argument for this concept that I haven't seen discussed anywhere. If SEAS wants to build more Sesame Places, there is no safer way to try out that idea than by constructing the concept proposed in the survey last week.
Lets look at the absolute worst case scenario for a moment: Sesame Place Williamsburg doesn't find its market and turns out not to be a financially viable park.
In most cases, if a new park found themselves in this situation, they would be forced to shut the gates, try to sell off some rides, and get out from under the land. A good case study for this is one of the most recent new theme parks to come to the United States: Celebration City.
Celebration City opened in 2003 as an adult-targeted, sister-park to Silver Dollar City. They were located within five miles of one another and the idea was that, since both parks had different target demographics, they could both thrive.
By the end of the 2008 season, Hershend determined that, due to unmet financial expectations (largely attributed to the economy at the time), they would cease operations of Celebration City.
Because just a few miles separated the parks, Hershend's hands were tied—all of the park's newly constructed facilities, rides, etc. had to be simply left to rot.
Now think about SEAS's Sesame Place Williamsburg proposal. If the absolute worst case scenario happened at Sesame Place Williamsburg and it was determined that the park was simply not financially viable, what could SEAS do? Spend a couple thousand dollars reconnecting it to Busch Gardens Williamsburg.
Yes, their new park would have failed and it would really suck, but ultimately, SEAS would have just given Busch Gardens Williamsburg a much larger children's area than Kings Dominion in a sorta round-about way.
Having that as the absolute worst case scenario makes this project seem like a VERY safe investment to me.
EDIT: Nicole liked this point so much that she asked to integrate it into her BGWFans post in the new section titled "Mitigated Risk."