I shared at a recent City Council meeting that Cedar Fair is ignoring the marketing opportunities they could develop by partnering with the 49ers when the stadium opens.
Let's have a contest, prize to be determined, to surface some professional marketing opportunities for Cedar Fair.
When media giant Paramount owned Great America, the ownership team's professionals reached out regularly to the local community and to the Bay Area to increase Great America visibility. While Cedar Fair may not have depth in West Coast marketing experience, we in Santa Clara can share our outreach skills with our corporate neighbor.
Here are some ideas from me. I look forward to reading everyone else's marketing concepts too.
1) Target outreach to 49ers season ticket holders to offer weekend package deals. For a Sunday game, arrive midday Saturday, check into a nearby Santa Clara hotel, visit Great America and enjoy a relaxing evening before going crazy at the '49ers game on Sunday. If one really wants to get creative, allow the special weekend package deal to admit the holder to the park on Saturday AND Sunday for one package rate.
2) Invite all fans to present their football admission ticket for half price entry to the park after any local game.
3) Special "off-season" Great America deals for '49ers season ticket holders, such as discounts on birthday parties, etc.
4) Theme celebrations based on the visiting team's home location. For example, there are plenty of folks in the South Bay who hail from Pittsburgh. Whenever the Steelers come to town, Great America could host a theme day focused on folks who used to call the Western Pennsylvania area "home."
5) And, a big idea: partner with the many other events the stadium will host so more bodies enter the theme park.
Santa Clara County is an incredibly diverse and affluent community. We host lots of ethnicities, languages and work skills. Let's work together, fellow Santa Clarans, to help Great America's marketing efforts. Cedar Fair is a publicly-traded company; let's help them with some quality local public input. Click on the comments link below to share your marketing ideas gratis with Cedar Fair.
- Chris Stampolis
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Cedar Fair blah-blah-blah. Your Council words were baseless
At tonight's City Council meeting, Cedar Fair's mouthpiece stated that of more than 60,000 expected football game attendees, Cedar Fair believes hardly any will enter Great America before or after the game. That representative wants the public to believe that a family may take their kids to an NFL game, but not to an NFL game and Great America on the same day.
While it's possible that some parents would balk at paying admission to Great America and to a 49ers game on the same day, one must note that most local visitors to Great America buy a season pass. If you're going to go to Great America even twice a calendar year, you're nuts not to buy a season pass. Thus, it's outrageous that Cedar Fair concludes there are no "cross-marketing opportunities." Who's running Cedar Fair? Their assertions are simply silly.
Great America makes money primarily from food sales, arcade costs and gift incidentals -- not from day-to-day admissions. Work a deal with the '9ers you Cedar Fair dorks! If you bring in several thousand ballgame visitors into Great America for even an hour or two, you'll sell a whole lot of high-priced funnel cakes, esp3especially if you've already sold them a season pass. My goodness, what dingbats you folks are!
Sprinkle some powdered sugar on top, Cedar Fair. You say you're worried about losing park visitors who wake up and say "we'd like to Great America today, but it won't be fun if the football team is playing." Think big; think creative; think fun.
While it's possible that some parents would balk at paying admission to Great America and to a 49ers game on the same day, one must note that most local visitors to Great America buy a season pass. If you're going to go to Great America even twice a calendar year, you're nuts not to buy a season pass. Thus, it's outrageous that Cedar Fair concludes there are no "cross-marketing opportunities." Who's running Cedar Fair? Their assertions are simply silly.
Great America makes money primarily from food sales, arcade costs and gift incidentals -- not from day-to-day admissions. Work a deal with the '9ers you Cedar Fair dorks! If you bring in several thousand ballgame visitors into Great America for even an hour or two, you'll sell a whole lot of high-priced funnel cakes, esp3especially if you've already sold them a season pass. My goodness, what dingbats you folks are!
Sprinkle some powdered sugar on top, Cedar Fair. You say you're worried about losing park visitors who wake up and say "we'd like to Great America today, but it won't be fun if the football team is playing." Think big; think creative; think fun.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Hey Cedar Fair: Is your America Great?
As we have been rearing our young toddler through his first year of life and nurturing our first born through his first months of Kindergarten, my household also has been gearing up to dedicate substantial energy to the success of Santa Clara's Mission City News. We'll be back in print before the end of 2007 and over the coming weeks this blog will launch dialogue about hot local issues.
Lots of Santa Clarans are following the "Great" 49ers debate closely. And, nearly all of us are proud that "America" guarantees a freedom of speech and debate.
But amid the "Great" benefits we all find in "America," I really have to question the motives of Great America's owners Cedar Fair.
First they're for a Santa Clara stadium, then they are neutral on the stadium, then they are opposed, then neutral again, and most recently opposed. Cedar Fair has more flip-flops than a discount retailer on Waikiki.
I find the Cedar Fair position almost completely without merit and here is the basis for my opinion: businesses watch their bottom line and a new stadium next door only can help sagging attendance at Cedar Fair's Great America.
Today, in late November, we are nearing the high point of the pro football season. Is Great America open this month? Uh, no. Was Great America open last month (October)? No. Will Great America be open next month (December) or the following month (January)? Uh, no and no.
So, even if the 49ers were enjoying a successful win-loss record and heading for the playoffs, would the football team's success negatively impact Cedar Fair? Not possible. Great America hasn't been open during most of a football season for decades.
So, let's look at the possible impact of a few Sunday football games on Cedar Fair's Great America (CFGA). What are the big attendance dates at CFGA? Spring Break/Easter weekend; Memorial Day weekend; the July 4th holidays; the mid-summer vacation days.
Um, now last time I checked.... the NFL doesn't start exhibition season till August. So, the big dates for Cedar Fair absolutely cannot conflict with a football game.
Where could there be a few "conflicts"? Late September and early October come to mind, but if you've ever visited Great America on the weekends after school starts, especially on Sundays, you clearly note that attendance is wayyyyyy down during that time of year. So, if the 49ers bring in 60,000 fans for a ballgame and even 2 percent take the opportunity to visit Great America, that's an extra 1,200 park visitors who otherwise would not have visited.
Great America: Please live up to your name and show us something "Great" about why a Santa Clara stadium next door would hurt your bottom line. For now, be aware that we plan to exercise America's free speech opportunities to point out your inconsistencies and to encourage a fact-filled dialogue about what Cedar Fair's really seeking.
comments on this post are welcome...
Chris Stampolis
Publisher, Santa Clara's Mission City News
Lots of Santa Clarans are following the "Great" 49ers debate closely. And, nearly all of us are proud that "America" guarantees a freedom of speech and debate.
But amid the "Great" benefits we all find in "America," I really have to question the motives of Great America's owners Cedar Fair.
First they're for a Santa Clara stadium, then they are neutral on the stadium, then they are opposed, then neutral again, and most recently opposed. Cedar Fair has more flip-flops than a discount retailer on Waikiki.
I find the Cedar Fair position almost completely without merit and here is the basis for my opinion: businesses watch their bottom line and a new stadium next door only can help sagging attendance at Cedar Fair's Great America.
Today, in late November, we are nearing the high point of the pro football season. Is Great America open this month? Uh, no. Was Great America open last month (October)? No. Will Great America be open next month (December) or the following month (January)? Uh, no and no.
So, even if the 49ers were enjoying a successful win-loss record and heading for the playoffs, would the football team's success negatively impact Cedar Fair? Not possible. Great America hasn't been open during most of a football season for decades.
So, let's look at the possible impact of a few Sunday football games on Cedar Fair's Great America (CFGA). What are the big attendance dates at CFGA? Spring Break/Easter weekend; Memorial Day weekend; the July 4th holidays; the mid-summer vacation days.
Um, now last time I checked.... the NFL doesn't start exhibition season till August. So, the big dates for Cedar Fair absolutely cannot conflict with a football game.
Where could there be a few "conflicts"? Late September and early October come to mind, but if you've ever visited Great America on the weekends after school starts, especially on Sundays, you clearly note that attendance is wayyyyyy down during that time of year. So, if the 49ers bring in 60,000 fans for a ballgame and even 2 percent take the opportunity to visit Great America, that's an extra 1,200 park visitors who otherwise would not have visited.
Great America: Please live up to your name and show us something "Great" about why a Santa Clara stadium next door would hurt your bottom line. For now, be aware that we plan to exercise America's free speech opportunities to point out your inconsistencies and to encourage a fact-filled dialogue about what Cedar Fair's really seeking.
comments on this post are welcome...
Chris Stampolis
Publisher, Santa Clara's Mission City News
Monday, February 19, 2007
Santa Clara's Ethics Committee
Currently the City of Santa Clara has an Ethics Committee, composed of three councilmembers and some staff.
Previously there was a Campaign Finance Reform Committee and a separate Ethics Ordinance Committee. The Campaign Finance Reform Committee was a committee composed of councilmembers. The Ethics Ordinance Committee was a committee composed of councilmembers and two representatives of the Citizens' Advisory Committee (CAC). As past chair of CAC, I was the person who appointed Josephine Rowen and Martin Grosz to represent CAC in Ethics Ordinance Committee discussions, so I have some personal knowledge of the distinction between the two previous committees.
Though I supported merging the two committees into one committee, I did not support removing CAC representatives from formal participation. In fact, I still believe citizen participation in such discussions brings valuable benefits to the public and should be reconsidered.
And, there is still business for the renamed "Ethics Committee" to consider:
1) The committee should consider moving back the final date to disclose city council candidate donations so news media and the public have additional time to review the materials and to contact candidates with questions, clarifications, etc. Currently there is less than a week before election time for anyone to review the filings, and there are only three days between disclosure and Friday afternoon, the very latest day that final campaign mailers must be taken to bulk mail. When one pushes back printing and labelling schedules, etc., there is hardly any time to publicize the content of those final filings either for newspapers or for campaign mailings. And, the final donation report can provide valuable insights into a candidate's campaign.
2) The committee should open up the content of the "Final Word" evening so anything that has occurred since the previous televised forum is fair game for discussions. If this best is resolved by scheduling more frequent televised candidate interactions, then so be it. But, it makes little sense to limit the candidates' discussions of concerns they otherwise have not had the opportunity to discuss with their opponents on television.
3) The committee should address the concern of planning consultants who work in town, but who do not carry a City of Santa Clara business license. Under-the-table payments should be a thing of the past. The City's ordinances already require all businesspeople to obtain a City business license, whether they run a multi-billion dollar high tech firm or a home business of any type. If someone is paid to represent an applicant before the Historical and Landmarks Commission, the Planning Commission, the Architectural Review Committee or the Council, that representative should hold a City of Santa Clara business license. The cost is minimal but the message of respect for City procedures is substantial. And, if someone holds a business license, there is a better chance that payments will be handled respectfully and not like some form of pizza money.
4) The commitee should ask candidates for public office in Santa Clara to pledge only to hire paid political consultants who hold a valid business license. Why should council candidates spend money on people who refuse to comply with a basic City law? Santa Clara has a provision in its business license fee structure that provides for a nominal annual fee for people with offices in other cities, but who conduct some form of "non-office" business in Santa Clara. So, that's not a high hurdle to ask of consultants sited in other cities. And, for any political consultants whose primary business address is in Santa Clara, those folks have no excuse not to abide by City of Santa Clara business license requirements.
I ask the Ethics Committee to agendize and to discuss these four items in public session at their earliest convenience.
Previously there was a Campaign Finance Reform Committee and a separate Ethics Ordinance Committee. The Campaign Finance Reform Committee was a committee composed of councilmembers. The Ethics Ordinance Committee was a committee composed of councilmembers and two representatives of the Citizens' Advisory Committee (CAC). As past chair of CAC, I was the person who appointed Josephine Rowen and Martin Grosz to represent CAC in Ethics Ordinance Committee discussions, so I have some personal knowledge of the distinction between the two previous committees.
Though I supported merging the two committees into one committee, I did not support removing CAC representatives from formal participation. In fact, I still believe citizen participation in such discussions brings valuable benefits to the public and should be reconsidered.
And, there is still business for the renamed "Ethics Committee" to consider:
1) The committee should consider moving back the final date to disclose city council candidate donations so news media and the public have additional time to review the materials and to contact candidates with questions, clarifications, etc. Currently there is less than a week before election time for anyone to review the filings, and there are only three days between disclosure and Friday afternoon, the very latest day that final campaign mailers must be taken to bulk mail. When one pushes back printing and labelling schedules, etc., there is hardly any time to publicize the content of those final filings either for newspapers or for campaign mailings. And, the final donation report can provide valuable insights into a candidate's campaign.
2) The committee should open up the content of the "Final Word" evening so anything that has occurred since the previous televised forum is fair game for discussions. If this best is resolved by scheduling more frequent televised candidate interactions, then so be it. But, it makes little sense to limit the candidates' discussions of concerns they otherwise have not had the opportunity to discuss with their opponents on television.
3) The committee should address the concern of planning consultants who work in town, but who do not carry a City of Santa Clara business license. Under-the-table payments should be a thing of the past. The City's ordinances already require all businesspeople to obtain a City business license, whether they run a multi-billion dollar high tech firm or a home business of any type. If someone is paid to represent an applicant before the Historical and Landmarks Commission, the Planning Commission, the Architectural Review Committee or the Council, that representative should hold a City of Santa Clara business license. The cost is minimal but the message of respect for City procedures is substantial. And, if someone holds a business license, there is a better chance that payments will be handled respectfully and not like some form of pizza money.
4) The commitee should ask candidates for public office in Santa Clara to pledge only to hire paid political consultants who hold a valid business license. Why should council candidates spend money on people who refuse to comply with a basic City law? Santa Clara has a provision in its business license fee structure that provides for a nominal annual fee for people with offices in other cities, but who conduct some form of "non-office" business in Santa Clara. So, that's not a high hurdle to ask of consultants sited in other cities. And, for any political consultants whose primary business address is in Santa Clara, those folks have no excuse not to abide by City of Santa Clara business license requirements.
I ask the Ethics Committee to agendize and to discuss these four items in public session at their earliest convenience.
Debate invites participation when actual issues are discussed
Some blogs are loaded with content.
Other blogs are wall-to-wall character assassination, rumors and rumors of rumors.
We will attempt here to stick to facts and opinions, while staying away from unfactual personal attacks.
Santa Clara is a triple college town, hosting Santa Clara University, Golden State Baptist College and Mission College, in addition to serving as the hometown of students of San Jose State University and other regional schools.
Since our city offers substantial academic credentials, the least we can do here is stick to issues and to foster real debate on those issues. This blog encourages other local blogs to strive for the same standards and not to confuse satire with evil-spirited falsification and gossip.
Please join in the dialogue to share your perspectives on local issues.
Other blogs are wall-to-wall character assassination, rumors and rumors of rumors.
We will attempt here to stick to facts and opinions, while staying away from unfactual personal attacks.
Santa Clara is a triple college town, hosting Santa Clara University, Golden State Baptist College and Mission College, in addition to serving as the hometown of students of San Jose State University and other regional schools.
Since our city offers substantial academic credentials, the least we can do here is stick to issues and to foster real debate on those issues. This blog encourages other local blogs to strive for the same standards and not to confuse satire with evil-spirited falsification and gossip.
Please join in the dialogue to share your perspectives on local issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)