Staff Redundancies

[micksalt]

I was at Thorpe Park last week, and that place felt like a Ghost Town when it came to finding members of staff. At several times I felt I'd need to take a long cane onto the ride with me so I could push the 'start' buttons from my seat. Merlin certainly are not investing their money there, with Tidal Wave emptied of water and looking a mess, Stealth out of action, Samurai relying on the operator to manually park the ride based on hand-signals from his assistance because the self-parking has obviously failed.

 

[Grand_Nash]

Lets be honest, Merlin don't want theme parks. Why don't they sell them? (LEGO is different with the KIRKBI arrangement) They'd make a bomb and save money....

I don't think that's the case. I think towers has needed restructuring for a long time. Without theme parks the annual pass sales would vanish.

I don't get the entrance price. They can afford to sell cheaper ano get people to spend money. But again if the price is lower annual pass sales fall. They inflated the price so BOGOF and perception of value for money buy if they did away with the BOGOF and said 2016 is £28 entry people would flock to the resort.

But then they alienate the BOGOF guests.

 

[GaryH]

What they should do is lower the entrance price to, lets say £30 at most, get rid of BOGOF vouchers, and instead, have vouchers which offer discount to stay in the hotels. That way they get people into the park and people staying over spending money on stuff in the hotels, waterpark, tree top quest etc.

 

[Poisson]

They'd be fine without MAP sales, hence them happily selling for the cost of <2 OTD AT visits. Since I've paid attention in the last 3 seasons, I've been to Towers 41 times, Chessie once and Thorpe 3 times. Midways? The London Cluster, so 4 midways and SeaLife Trafford, 5 in total then. They don't need it, flutter some vouchers for midways about and people will come running. My passes don't quite equate to seasons (May expiry) but I've had 2 standard and 1 premium MAP in the time, so 99*2 + 119 = £317. My trips to both parks and midways at now prices have been £2300+. They make faaaaaaarrrr more from BOGOF and people not realising how much things are costing. Also they'd lose a lot of debt/problems that Chessie and Thorpe are by selling them.

 

[PeteB]

They need to focus more on long term investments instead of doing everything on the cheap. Look at their last two big rides installed (Sub-terra and Smiler) both of which are the two most recent rides to be added and have now been SBNO for the best part of this year.

This is what I meant to add to my post also. So 2 of the most recent rides are SBNO'd, with the 3rd (Ice Age) now only running 1 show per hour. So what else have we got:

Th13teen - it may have pulled guests into the park in 2010, but ultimately everyone was let down. We all know that story.
Battle Galleons - who actually bothers to ride it?
SeaLife - who cares, they're everywhere.

So 5 fails in Merlin's recent years. And as for everything else in the park, it's been around for so long that people are becoming bored. Was thinking this on Sunday at fireworks, I'm essentially paying this park to spend a day going around all of the same rides that have been there for 10, 20, 30 years. Nothing new, and most of it is knackered.

Look at how many rides need a major overhaul or replacement:

The Flume - closed over scarefest and fireworks. It's very old.
Ripsaw - knackered
The Blade - old, no one cares, and it's marked for removal soon.
Submission - gone and not replaced
Enterprise - old.
Hex - knackered, and when you know the story word for word it's pain to go through just to get to the spinning room.
Duel - a total mess since it was converted to zombie shooting
CATCF - the less said the better

Then there's the general state of the park. Everything is overgrown, messy, untidy, tired and worn. Nemesis is a prime example. Just look at it. What an eyesore. And has anyone walked through the gardens lately? Worst state I've ever seen them in. I walked through on the first day of Scarefest and saw 2 gardeners slaving away trying to keep on top of things. Obviously there must have been cutbacks and now the gardening team can't look after them any more. Same goes for the rest of the park really. It's a shabby, tatty, overgrown mess.

So as for rides, the last thrill ride which is actually open was built 10 years ago (Rita). And its the one ride I generally avoid unless the queue for it is small.

 

[jon81uk]

I just hope Merlin have a strategy to get people back to the park and are not purely focussing on cutting costs. Investment is what will bring people back through the gates, and I really think they need to look at ticket pricing. Cutting everything back only damages the product, and if you damage the product so much you lose those all important repeat visits and recommendations.

and one thing I notice looking through TripAdvisor is people talking about prices. Even on a four star review people mention that car parking seems expensive and food & drink are overpriced. I think with the park looking rough around the edges (it needs a lot of cleaning and painting!) people notice the high prices more.
They need to keep investing in the parks, small quality well themed things can still work (look at the Ancestors during Scarefest for example) it doesn't have to be a new coaster for now. I think they need to cut the prices slightly. Maybe reduce the gate price to a round £50 and offer a 50% online discount if booking a month out, then reduce the discount closer to the day. Online booking should make staffing level needs easier to predict as well. Then phase out the 2for1s as they cheapen the brand!

 

[Burbs]

(look at the Ancestors during Scarefest for example)

Totally agree. The ancestors that were in Gloomy Wood during the day made a rather dull walk to Forbidden Valley much more enjoyable and interactive. We need to see more of this sort of thing.

 

[RoyJess]

I don't think the gate prices reflect whats currently on offer in the park in the way of rides. It also looks like Thorpe and Chessie are both having to make cuts.

If Merlin are pulling the purse strings very tightly, then what else can the parks do to invest and keep the park looking like a top theme park?

 

[jon81uk]

I really really hope this is the first sign of Merlin looking to package the UK parks up for sale

I don't.

They won't be any better off elsewhere really. Look at when Tussauds was owned by DIC, they didn't invest well in the parks either. Themeparks are a difficult industry and I don't see the parks being better being owned by anyone else unfortuantly. The only buyer I can thing of is the group that owns Oakwood and they sound worse than Merlin for maintanance etc.

 

[RoyJess]

I think another thing which has hit the tourist industry everywhere very hard in the last year or two is the fact that you are not allowed to take children out of school during term time without getting a hefty fine.

 

[Rick]

I think there is a fundamental lack of understanding in this thread with regards to how restructures work and the reasons for them. Redundancies of permanent staff does not necessarily mean less staff on any given day - it just means that you can create a flexible staffing model that can better react to the requirements of the business. Salaried staff are there whether you need them or not, as are their pension contributions, ENI contribs etc etc. It is likely that contractors and seasonal staff will pick up a lot of the work that has been previously done by permanent staff.

For much of the past decade Alton has had fairly stable visitor numbers and thus a higher number of permanent staff is beneficial for a multitude of reasons, however with such a drastic change in the fundamental operations of the park, you have to react - you can't ignore it.

It's difficult to ignore the 'human' aspect of the redundancy process, those of you who have been through it will know just how awful it is for the individuals at risk and for those making the decision to let go of loyal and hardworking people. That said, management have a responsibility to the company and its shareholders to react to changing market conditions, if they didn't they wouldn't be doing their jobs and the long term security of the park (and of other employees) would in fact be in greater jeopardy.

Well duh! This is the theme park and amusement industry. How is this statement anything new? Tell us something we don't know.

Press releases are always full of 'obvious' points, that's the way that they work? I don't understand the problem.

 

[EuroSatch]

I don't.

They won't be any better off elsewhere really. Look at when Tussauds was owned by DIC, they didn't invest well in the parks either. Themeparks are a difficult industry and I don't see the parks being better being owned by anyone else unfortuantly. The only buyer I can thing of is the group that owns Oakwood and they sound worse than Merlin for maintanance etc.

Disagree. The right investors with the right intentions are what is needed in the UK parks. Merlin don't have an interest the parks for any reasons other than maximising profits. Tussauds hit a better balance, albeit trailing off when they came to sell. If an investor who is genuinely passionate about creating a theme park escapism environment comes along, then changes can be made

 

[PeteB]

Pearson did it right and that is why they made huge profits out of it. Charterhouse, DIC and Merlin are all venture capitalists.

 

[Slugjc]

I think another thing which has hit the tourist industry everywhere very hard in the last year or two is the fact that you are not allowed to take children out of school during term time without getting a hefty fine.

working in a school I know just how ineffective this is. Either lie to the school or pay the fine as its still cheaper with the fine then going during the school holidays. It hasn't done a thing in stopping this problem.

However as for what happening, Merlin have done only what a company can do, and reduce its costs. Not having a new USP (enchanted village will only attract small amounts at that price) and having to turn people away, obviously takes its toll on the till. In the upcoming years they will have to spend to get money back. A new ride that will pull the punters in, good PR with the wide world to get trust back in its product.

As for Alton Towers itself the crash obviously had a huge impact on people coming. Either with the media help or not. My experience with people I know is that after planning a trip around that time, seeing that the place was shut they looked elsewhere and did things that were cheaper, the crash had no effect on them going but the price did. After researching they could do things with the family for hundreds pounds cheaper and have just the same amount of fun.

I feel for the people and I hope that they have just been moved around to another part of merlin, taken early retirement or that they quickly move on to a new job. Either way its a sad day, but one that merlin can hopefully build on. we may not like merlin, but I cant see anybody else being able to run it. In my opinion Alton Towers had just become too expensive to really work in this country.

 

[Leah]

I don't like merlin, but without a large body company, I doubt towers would still be open, or able to have the same investments. Everyone complains about merlin and how towers would be so much better off without them running it, but how can towers benefit from it (the park would be run better, but would probably shut because of the short term money issues).

I thoughts go out to those losing their jobs, and I'm hoping that it's not the full 190 going, but I hope next season will be better, we have known since June that this season will be a write off, but at least their profits and shares have began to to rise again.

 

[Funcone]

Independent parks are gradually being swallowed up my major companies and there are reasons for it. There are economies of scale. Merlin bulk buys the food and merchandise for all their parks and probably gets better prices for doing it. They can move staff around and share expertise. They can drive hard bargains with ride manufacturers, or spread the cost on an intellectual property between a range of attractions. They have a lot of marketing power, and can cut deals with national brands by offering them deals across the country.

Having said that, if Alton Towers was an independent business they probably wouldn’t have sold off the land the park sits on and leased it back, because Merlin effectively bought Tussauds with its own money. Alton Towers might have had a serious fall in visitor numbers, but they should still be making a profit. They just can't afford to pay a large fee to rent the mud heir rides sit on at the moment. The same goes for Sea World, who’ve had a steady fall in visitors (not least because of Black Fish), but who wouldn’t be losing money if a certain equity group hadn’t piled large sums of debt onto them. Both Sea World and Tussauds were effectively bought with money their new owners didn't have, and left them with liabilities that made them financially precarious.

Both companies have now been hit with misfortunes, and are struggling. Although despite the problems at Alton Towers, Merlin are still making large profits.Perhaps one 'positive' (depending on how you look at it), is that following the announcement the Merlin share price has taken a slight dip. It's always galling when a company lays off staff, and their share price rockets up.

 

[James]

Alton Towers will always be owned by a 'large body company'. Although they could do with better than Merlin (if there is better around any more). Merlin, and some management at Towers are just running the place into the ground. Things got better in 2008, 2009 was OK, 2010 saw potential, the years that have followed it's felt like the place is becoming more and of providing the bare minimum, at premium prices. There's no value for money from a guest perspective.

 

[jon81uk]

There are economies of scale. Merlin bulk buys the food and merchandise for all their parks and probably gets better prices for doing it. They can move staff around and share expertise.

Tussauds were doing this 25 years ago anyway to some extent. All the parks stocked Cadbury and served Coke. Chessington and Towers had McDonalds and KFC (Thorpe was bought by Tussauds later and on seperate contract).
John Wardley started at Chessington and moved around the Tussauds group back in the 90s even.

The question is more about who owned the Tussauds group as to how much investment is/was made.

 

[Enter Valhalla]

That's a rather interesting and cold point of view, which just makes it sound like you're on Merlin's side. It comes back to what we were talking about last night. Why should staff who have nothing to do with the fall in profit have to suffer from it, rather than the incompetent idiots that have been dragging the park and the company down? It's much easier for the bosses to just cut a load of 'lesser' jobs than take a look in the mirror at their own performances and salaries.

Its not a cold point of view at all. And what's this nonsense about being on merlin's side? Who said I am taking sides at all? Obviously I want Alton towers to succeed and ultimately stay open and bring in new investments and offer a great service so if that means being on Merlin's side then yes I guess I am. Not being on their side would be me wanting them to crash and burn which I don't.

You say why should the staff suffer but surely anyone who knows anything about the world of business will know that sadly this is often the way things work. As I say, AT and Merlin are not charities and don't owe anyone a living. To put it simply if you had a successful small business employing two people and found that one year you attracted less custom and realised that the work could now be done by just one person would you keep employing two people simply out of kindness? Of course you wouldn't. Especially if it meant your company was struggling financially. Whilst redundancies are always sad, they are sometimes unavoidable. Less guests means less work and therefore less staff are required. Yes that may not be the fault of the staff themselves but if they're not needed why employ them just to sit there looking pretty? No sensible company would do that.

Just to be absolutely clear, I mean no disrespect to anyone facing redundancy.

 

[Martin]

"It's not their fault but oh well, tough luck" is cold. And yes, businesses do owe people a living, otherwise people would have no money to spend on businesses to keep them going, that's how economics works. I would utilise those staff better to recuperate the loss, but I'm not a capitalist ghoul who only cares about the short term bottom line. The comparison doesn't really work, because the loss of income and customer satisfaction wasn't caused by market forces, it was caused by incompetence, incompetence by the people who will be swinging the axe. That may be how business works but that doesn't mean we should be ok with that.

Merlin management have two ways they can go about it. Either they take a hard look at themselves and fix what's gone wrong, or they take the easy option and take it out on staff. Staff have always been something Alton Towers has done well, cutting them isn't going to help their falling reputation, it'll make it worse. It may reduce their overheads but it won't help their income, and it'll just get worse as word of mouth spreads about the lack of staff and their decrease in performance. Too many staff isn't a problem and redundancies won't help the park at all, it's nothing but a cash grab that they've finally got an excuse to make.