2021: General Discussion

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.

AT86

TS Member
It appears Alton Towers have done away with the cheaper child ticket price for 3-11yrs which was from £27.50, and now everyone over 3 pays the adult rate, £34 midweek and £39 weekends/school holidays.

jQIil8H.jpg
 

Thameslink Rail

TS Member
Favourite Ride
The Smiler
It appears Alton Towers have done away with the cheaper child ticket price for 3-11yrs which was from £27.50, and now everyone over 3 pays the adult rate, £34 midweek and £39 weekends/school holidays.

jQIil8H.jpg
Are they trying to put people off coming for some reason? We've had the opening times fiasco, the non-existent customer service and now this?
 

s_g_k

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Oblivion
It appears Alton Towers have done away with the cheaper child ticket price for 3-11yrs which was from £27.50, and now everyone over 3 pays the adult rate, £34 midweek and £39 weekends/school holidays.

jQIil8H.jpg
That’s a disgrace! Why should a 4 year old who can’t go on most rides be charged the same price as an adult?!
 

AT86

TS Member
That’s a disgrace! Why should a 4 year old who can’t go on most rides be charged the same price as an adult?!

Just had a quick look at the other Merlin parks and it seems this is the case across all of them now. Online price is the same for all ages, no reduced child rates.
 

Ethan

TS Member
It appears Alton Towers have done away with the cheaper child ticket price for 3-11yrs which was from £27.50, and now everyone over 3 pays the adult rate, £34 midweek and £39 weekends/school holidays.

jQIil8H.jpg
What?? How can a company like this not have separate child and adult tickets. Its been like that for years hahaha
 

imanautie

TS Member
I'm guessing that they feel that the demand is there at the moment to be able to charge these prices and still get enough paying customers with children. They can always reduce them again in a year or so if needs be.
Is it too pessimistic of me to think they will do child rates as a DFS promotion?
 

pluk

TS Member
I imagine the thinking is with capacity restrictions a place is a place regardless of whether it is taken by a child or adult. Too many children could easily have a big effect on their profitability.

Adventure Island in Southend have also removed the different colour bands, all pay the same flat rate now regardless of age or height. Paultons have always been a full price ticket for everyone over 1m, which will be approx a 3 year old. It's not unheard of.
 

Skyscraper

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Nemesis
In case anyone's interested, just noticed that Twilight tickets are available for today and tomorrow (entry after 4pm). :)
 

jon81uk

TS Member
Paultons have always been a full price ticket for everyone over 1m, which will be approx a 3 year old. It's not unheard of.
I don’t have kids.
But stating that the adult price applies over 1m sounds fairer than age 3, despite as you say it is basically the same thing. I wonder how many families don’t realise how tall their kids are until trying to get into the park?

Also I would expect at Paultons a 1m child could ride a lot and a 1.2m everything? Whereas at Alton Towers there is still quite a lot of 1.4m that kids can’t ride, but then those over 1.4 won’t be interested in the CBeebies stuff so it probably balances out anyway.
 

jon81uk

TS Member
By my maths, a 1m tall child can do 63% of the rides at Alton Towers and 89% of the rides at Paultons (not including up-charges)
So if Alton Towers decided to go with height based pricing it would probably be based on under 1.2m is a child, as anyone over 1.2m can also go on Wickerman, Thirteen and the Rapids (1.1m) plus maybe a few more.
 

Matt N

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Mako (SeaWorld Orlando)
I actually think height-based pricing would be more inclusive than age-based pricing, to be honest.

With age-based pricing, there are some possible loopholes that might mean some people get short changed, or others might benefit from it disproportionately; say, for example, that you’re above 3 years old, but particularly short, therefore can’t ride much. You’d still need to pay full price in spite of that. You might also be below 3 years old, but particularly tall, so can ride lots of things. You’d get in for free in spite of being able to do quite a lot.

I think height-based pricing removes that element, as height does actually dictate how much people can ride, whereas age doesn’t, for the most part (barring certain advisory age restrictions on things like scare mazes, the Alton Towers Dungeon and Sub-Terra). Height is also easier to enforce than age; you can tell quite easily whether someone is above or below a certain height marker, while age isn’t quite so easy to pinpoint (case in point; I’m in Year 13, and approaching 18 years old, and tons of people think I’m a good few years younger than I actually am!).

In fairness, though, I think it’s very kind of the park to even offer free entry to under-3’s; they could just charge everyone full price if they wanted to, regardless of age or height!

On the flip side, another question I have is; why is it that the park’s threshold for letting kids ride unaccompanied is height-based as opposed to age-based, as surely age is a bigger indicator of how maturely a child can behave unaccompanied on a ride than height? Under the current way of doing things, wouldn’t that mean that if a ride had a height restriction of 1.2m to ride unaccompanied (as an example), a very tall 5-6 year old, who you’d typically expect to still need/want company, can ride alone, whereas a very short 7-8 year old, who might be mature enough to ride alone, isn’t able to? I guess height is an easier method to enforce than age, but it’s still a question I thought was an interesting point to consider.
 
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top