Paultons Park: General Discussion

[Themepark-newbie]

I would suggest that as they clearly have money to invest and consistently rank amongst the top theme parks from a customer service and satisfaction point of view that they probably have the pricing strategy nailed off.

 

[Bowser]

One hour queues are an anomaly at Paultons, even the average longest wait time for the busiest attraction is 29 minutes but realistically unless you're incredibly unlucky you're only going to be waiting 20-25 minutes for a ride on a busy day and typically less.

The pricing scheme is part of what enables this by setting a lower capacity in the name of a better customer experience. Most children are beyond the free entry mark by age 4 but i'd argue the appeal of Peppa Pig extends beyond that anyway.

People are too engrained in the Merlin race to the bottom model and the erosion of value but what Paultons are doing is evidently working well for them.

 

[Matt N]

I agree that the Merlin way is not necessarily the ideal way of doing things, but my one thought about Paultons' pricing model is; does it not enforce a bit of a cap on their future growth as a business if taken to too much of an extreme?

It works at the scale the park is currently at, but if they want to grow and invest more into the business in the years to come, the only way to do that is to make more money, which would mean that they'd either have to raise the prices to ridiculous levels in order to fund more growth and investment and maintain the same guest figures or accept that visitor figures might be higher some days than those that allow for the practically walk-on queues that are par for the course currently.

If Paultons uses price as a way to keep visitor figures low, there's only so far they can really take that before people begin to just say no to the high pricing and custom falls. If they want to grow, I think they may eventually have to accept that some days will be busy. Even the likes of Europa Park have accepted this.

I'm not saying that the "sell them cheap, pile them high" model is one to aspire towards, but I think the "sell them expensive, pile them low" model that Paultons currently follows in order to keep guest figures very low may inhibit their growth potential in the years to come if taken to too much of an extreme.

 

[jon81uk]

This was my thought when I visited with my OH in October - if we'd had two young kids between us it would have cost us exactly the same. As it was, it seemed really expensive for two people compared with other parks with a similar offering. Yes it's lovely and well-kept and the theming of the newer areas is well done, but the pricing model currently only really makes sense for families with Peppa-Pig-World aged children. If they're going to try appealing more to all-age families they are going to have to revisit that pricing model. Better to reduce the cost for an adult visitor and bring in a tiered pricing system for younger visitors. I don't think all kids under 1m should be free when they're the best catered visitors at the park currently.

Children under 0.9m go free at Alton Towers, Chessington and Legoland )with under 1.2m free at Thorpe Park).

Does the 10cm of height make that much of a difference?

 

[NuttySquirrel]

Children under 0.9m go free at Alton Towers, Chessington and Legoland )with under 1.2m free at Thorpe Park).

Does the 10cm of height make that much of a difference?

Well it does, because at Merlin parks you don't feel that the price for adults/taller children is hiked up to allow the smaller ones to go free. It's easier to get deals for adult-only groups that makes it affordable to visit without small children.

If you're a family of 4 with 2 children over 1m, then I'd wager you'd look at the price of Paultons and think it's just too expensive for what's on offer that's likely to appeal to your group. Clearly this puts people off and drives them to the cheaper Merlin parks. That works as a business model if you're targeting younger families, but if Paultons want to start appealing to +1m children they will have to make it more attractive both in terms of ride offering and cost model. Outside of Peppa Pig World, that park is basically never busy - it could take a lot more guests and bring in a lot more revenue with just a few minor tweaks - without resorting to the 'pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap' tactic.

 

[IanB]

I feel as a family we would have a better day at Paulton Park than Alton Towers or Chessington, so even though its £30-£40 more expensive, I would still choose Paulton's over other parks in the UK. I have this feeling because I have visited Paulton's in the past when the kids have been free.

I don't think (And as I type this I feel like we might have taken Annabelle when she was 2 or 3) we have been to Chessington as a family, and that's because the reputation of Merlin means we know that it might be cheaper, but we also know that the experience is not going to be as good. I feel a little sad that we have had Merlin Annual Passes this year (Cancelled now) and we did not visit Chessington but I think it shows how little faith I have of having a good day out at Merlin Parks these days. (Alton Towers twice, Legoland once (Our only family trip), and Thorpe once)

We did not visit Paulton's for the first time this year, because we did not have the time, I think that is my one regret is not going to Paulton this year. We might visit next year and in 2026 for the new Viking area, but I am not sure we would visit again after that. Don't get me wrong, we could still go to Paulton's, and have a great day, but if your over 1.4m and enjoy theme parks and roller casters, would Paulton's Park be in your first choice park to visit?

I am surprised Alton Towers have not copied this for CBeebies Land, but the Early Play time at Peppa Pig Land is a clever way to get those under 1m paying to get in, while also gaining additional revenue from those over 1m. I also like it as is it a fast track system which has minimal impact on other guests: https://paultonspark.co.uk/tickets/early-play/

As I write this, I do feel bad for Daisy, but not as bad as Merlin should feel for making someone who loves theme parks, only have one family theme park visit in the UK because of their lack of investment in diverse rides. Daisy has been to Europa Park and Disneyland Paris this year, and she can not wait to go back to Europa Park next year.

Annabelle has been well looked after, with three visits to EP, two visits to Rulantica, two visits to Alton Towers, her first visit to Thorpe Park, Disneyland, and Octoberfest, she has had a good year.

I also can not complain as I got to enjoy all of the above, and even managed to throw in a Hollywood Studios in the Dark event with work, which was as brilliant as it sounds.

 

[Bowser]

It works at the scale the park is currently at, but if they want to grow and invest more into the business in the years to come, the only way to do that is to make more money, which would mean that they'd either have to raise the prices to ridiculous levels in order to fund more growth and investment and maintain the same guest figures or accept that visitor figures might be higher some days than those that allow for the practically walk-on queues that are par for the course currently.

Adding rides and an area increases the park capacity which in turn increases their income.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

Adding rides and an area increases the park capacity which in turn increases their income.

Considering that Paulton's allegedly doesn't need to add the capacity, you've pointed out a few times how short queues are, this doesn't quite tally.

Increasing park capacity would only generate additional revenue if the park regularly hit the capacity ceiling, and was literally turning customers away. From anecdotal reports, which aren't the plural of data, this doesn't happen.

Adding a new area which one can market, and use as an incentive to attract new and returning visitors, is a way to increase revenue. An increase in revenue doesn't always equal an increase in profit, however, depending on the size of your investment.

 

[jon81uk]

Well it does, because at Merlin parks you don't feel that the price for adults/taller children is hiked up to allow the smaller ones to go free. It's easier to get deals for adult-only groups that makes it affordable to visit without small children.

Or at Merlin parks all prices are too low and they make the actual money selling Fasttrack.

I don’t think Paulton’s is expensive, it’s Merlin who are too cheap. I think Alton’s variable price is a good thing, but they should have a lot more days that are the same price as Paulton. The fact you can get an online ticket for AT for about the same price as ten years ago isn’t a good thing.

 

[Bowser]

Considering that Paulton's allegedly doesn't need to add the capacity, you've pointed out a few times how short queues are, this doesn't quite tally.

Increasing park capacity would only generate additional revenue if the park regularly hit the capacity ceiling, and was literally turning customers away. From anecdotal reports, which aren't the plural of data, this doesn't happen.

Adding a new area which one can market, and use as an incentive to attract new and returning visitors, is a way to increase revenue. An increase in revenue doesn't always equal an increase in profit, however, depending on the size of your investment.

You’re missing the point. It’s relative, it allows them to operate at the same level of customer satisfaction with a higher number of people. If they were regularly hitting capacity the system wouldn’t be working in the first place.

 

[Matt N]

Adding rides and an area increases the park capacity which in turn increases their income.

But Paultons does not have limitless land. Eventually, new developments will have to replace existing things, so at that point, park capacity stops increasing. So at that point, more money needs to be funded through either higher prices or higher guest figures, and I feel like there’s only so much tolerance people will have for higher prices.

Keeping guest figures low is not the only way of getting good customer satisfaction. Europa Park, for example, can get very busy, but because their queues move at a lightning pace and there’s a large variety of rides, people still come out feeling fulfilled and guest feedback is still high (the fact that they’re repeatedly voted Best Park in the GTAs speaks volumes!).

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

You’re missing the point. It’s relative, it allows them to operate at the same level of customer satisfaction with a higher number of people. If they were regularly hitting capacity the system wouldn’t be working in the first place.

That's a nuance which was missing in your post, but yes, increasing the offering, whilst maintaining quality and guest experience, is a way to generate additional income.

 

[rob666]

It is a time of year where, on occasion, by individual personal need and time pressures, I have a full technobreak.
This year, it was the Paulton's topic specifically that created this urgent need to remove myself from the internet.
Absolutely no interest, can't avoid reading...

Happy festive things folks, see you next year.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

But Paultons does not have limitless land. Eventually, new developments will have to replace existing things, so at that point, park capacity stops increasing. So at that point, more money needs to be funded through either higher prices or higher guest figures, and I feel like there’s only so much tolerance people will have for higher prices.

You can decrease operational costs, or maintain a lean operation.

Paulton's doesn't have to pay a large entertainments staff, it doesn't require a large security presence, it doesn't require a team of car park attendants. The size of the site allow them to keep maintenance up, without having to increase spend on extra staff.

Revenue could also be increased by offering more premium experiences, they already have their VIP packages, but there could be an expansion.

You can only push ticket and food and beverage prices so high. You can find and exploit new seams of revenue which haven't been tapped yet, and keep operating costs low, maximising profit.

 

[Bowser]

But Paultons does not have limitless land. Eventually, new developments will have to replace existing things, so at that point, park capacity stops increasing. So at that point, more money needs to be funded through either higher prices or higher guest figures, and I feel like there’s only so much tolerance people will have for higher prices.

Keeping guest figures low is not the only way of getting good customer satisfaction. Europa Park, for example, can get very busy, but because their queues move at a lightning pace and there’s a large variety of rides, people still come out feeling fulfilled and guest feedback is still high (the fact that they’re repeatedly voted Best Park in the GTAs speaks volumes!).

That all relies on seeking unlimited growth. As a family run park they seem content to expand very slowly to maintain quality whilst still presumably operating at a profit.

As you say, there are other ways to maintain satisfaction but equally as a business there are other ways to grow beyond physical expansion,

 

[pluk]

But Paultons does not have limitless land. Eventually, new developments will have to replace existing things, so at that point, park capacity stops increasing. So at that point, more money needs to be funded through either higher prices or higher guest figures, and I feel like there’s only so much tolerance people will have for higher prices.

Keeping guest figures low is not the only way of getting good customer satisfaction. Europa Park, for example, can get very busy, but because their queues move at a lightning pace and there’s a large variety of rides, people still come out feeling fulfilled and guest feedback is still high (the fact that they’re repeatedly voted Best Park in the GTAs speaks volumes!).

You have explained your way out of the exact point you are making within the same post! Capacity of course is not defined by number of rides, but how many people those rides process, and Europa have organically grown by both ride numbers but probably more crucially by adding absolute throughput monsters and running them efficiently. The exact same options are available long term to Paultons as it grows, so they can continue to attract more people at a fairly level price point while maintaining the same service level and wait times. Like Europa have.

 

[owenstreet7]

You have explained your way out of the exact point you are making within the same post! Capacity of course is not defined by number of rides, but how many people those rides process, and Europa have organically grown by both ride numbers but probably more crucially by adding absolute throughput monsters and running them efficiently. The exact same options are available long term to Paultons as it grows, so they can continue to attract more people at a fairly level price point while maintaining the same service level and wait times. Like Europa have.

I believe that capacity is the key difference between Paultons and Europa.

Europa have got a lot of high throughput rides and attractions which along with very swift operations makes for faster moving queues.

I wouldn't say Paultons has a very high throughput on a lot of their attractions.

Pterosaur is an SFC and I haven't seen a Vekoma SFC that operates with more than one train so far. I do wonder when Vekoma will do an SFC model with more than one train.

Velociraptor is a Family Boomerang which naturally would have one train and lower capacity. Cobra is a wild mouse style coaster with naturally a lower capacity.

I don't think I'll say this but I think Dragon and Raging River going will have a big impact on capacity and queues. Especially the latter as it had a 1000 pph capacity according to Reverchon: https://reverchon.eu/water-ride-classic-flume/

That being one of the higher throughput ones including Storm Chaser, Sky Swinger and Cat O Pillar.

I'm hoping that the Vikings area will have some high capacity and throughput monsters as I can see the coaster being absolutely huge for the park (not necessarily in it's stats but in what it will pull to the park).

 

[TedShatner10]

I, for one, really enjoyed riding TH13TEEN, The Smiler, The Wicker Man, Gangsta Granny: The Ride, Ghost Train, The Swarm, Hyperia, Flight of the Sky Lion, Haunted House Monster Party, Lego City Deep Sea Adventure, Minifigure Speedway, Ninjago: The Ride and Mandrill Mayhem in 2009.

Merlin's parks are running a very broad range of world class in their day thrill rides and dark rides that Paultons still cannot directly compete against, but when guests comment on how new and in full working order Pepper Pig World seemingly still is in comparison to Cbeebies Land (which is already supposedly a bit rough round the edges after a similar stretch of time and Legoland Windsor also having a few weird, derelict "void spaces" like the disused Viking rapids, etc, when I was there recently), you get the image of Paultons being more consistent, pristine, and reliable as a theme park (and while Cobra, Flight of the Pterosaur, the Edge, and Storm Chaser certainly pale in comparison to Nemesis Reborn, the Smiler, the Swarm and Hyperia, etc, they've got shorter queues and less downtime to compensate).

Though Merlin are no slackers and the impending deaths of their theme parks feels a tad exaggerated now, even if their business/company model is flawed and bloated next to Paultons' (Alton Tower's firework display was spectacular for example).

However I wouldn't be surprised that Paultons Park will build an inverted family thrill coaster that is along the lines of Legoland Germany's Maximus or Plopsaland's Anubis (but maybe Valkyrie themed), then maybe amp up their coaster(s) from there by the turn of the 2030s.

 

[Shaggy_Dog_]

However I wouldn't be surprised that Paultons Park will build an inverted family thrill coaster that is along the lines of Legoland Germany's Maximus or Plopsaland's Anubis (but maybe Valkyrie themed), then maybe amp up their coaster(s) from there by the turn of the 2030s.

I don’t think Paulton’s would be looking to build an inverted family thrill coaster when they have an existing suspended family coaster in Flight Of The Pterosaur. Surely they’d want a new coaster to be something quite different, be it an LSM multi launcher, a woodie, a water coaster, etc. It wouldn’t make much sense to spend money on a new ride that looks very similar to an existing ride just with an added inversion or two. Its by adding new and unique experiences to the ride lineup that a park grows.

 

[Bowser]

I don't think I'll say this but I think Dragon and Raging River going will have a big impact on capacity and queues. Especially the latter as it had a 1000 pph capacity according to Reverchon: https://reverchon.eu/water-ride-classic-flume/

Whilst they get away with pretty poor ops at Paultons, I don’t think Raging River was ever particularly busy so would be surprised if it has a notably detrimental impact next year.