|
STRATEGIC ADVENTURE
PARK
In October 1989,
Sue and Lisa reviewed the first operating season of their adventure
park. Strategic Adventure Park, located 30 miles from a major
maritime city, catered to young adults who enjoyed active war games.
The partners were discussing future options and needed to decide on
what action should be taken because profits fell far short of
projected levels.
Sue and Lisa had
started an outdoor adventure game called "Capture the Flag". The
game was played by two 20-member teams of adults, and the object was
to capture the opposing team's flag. Each team's flag was located in
a specified area of the playing region; areas could vary from
forested hills to open fields. The first team to capture their
opponents' flag was the winner.
Team players
defended their flag with CO2 powered paint guns which shot paint
balls filled with water soluble dye. Players tried to shoot members
of the opposing team, and the first team to eliminate all opposing
players was declared the winner. Any player hit by a pellet and
marked with dye, was out of the game. The player then returned to
home base where he or she enjoyed refreshments while waiting 20 - 30
minutes for the next game to start. Home base offered music and
refreshments to promote an atmosphere of fun and
camaraderie.
Camouflage
clothing, protective goggles, guns, holsters and face paint were
provided. Each player was required to buy paint balls and CO2, as
well as pay a playing fee of $25.
Adventure games
were becoming increasingly popular in both the United States and
Canada. The concept behind the games had been developed by three
Americans. Charles Haines, an author of novels and screenplays,
lived in New Hampshire. His friend, Bob Gurnsey, was from the same
state. Prior to becoming the full time director of National Survival
Games, Bob had owned a ski shop. He also sailed deep water boats and
raced sport cars. The third man, Hayes Noel, was a New York stock
and option trader who was a serious runner and who had been a
college football player.
This case was prepared by Professor John
D Kyle of Mount Saint Vincent University for the Atlantic
Entrepreneurial Institute as a basis for classroom discussion, and
is not meant to illustrate either effective or ineffective
management.
Copyright 1990, for Atlantic
Entrepreneurial Institute. Reproduction of this case is allowed
without permission for educational purposes, but all such
reproductions must acknowledge the copyright. This permission does
not include publication.
There were at
least a dozen adventure games operating in Eastern Canada and
hundreds more south of the border. Participants played these games
for a variety of reasons. For many, the games were a personal stress
test or a physical workout that was also fun. For young, high-energy
executives, an adventure game was an opportunity to relax or to
enjoy a social outing. Game enthusiasts pointed out that a great
variety of people could and did play - men, women, athletes, doctors
and blue collar workers. Participants saw it as an ideal way to
enjoy the outdoors with friends. Besides being fun, the games were a
test of stamina and strategic skills.
The two
owner-managers of Strategic Adventure Park were in their early
thirties. Sue had spent a number of years in a resource-based
industry before returning to university to complete a degree in
commerce. Lisa's work experience had been in the tourist industry,
and now she was also studying toward a business
degree.
Another adventure
game operated in the western part of the province, approximately 150
kilometers from Strategic Adventure Park. A similar game operated in
Alberta. The owners of these firms reported that their players were
between the ages of 19 and 50. Consequently, Lisa and Sue had
directed their research to identifying the population in that age
group who lived or worked in Strategic Adventure Park's catchment
area. This information was incorporated into a comprehensive
business plan (Exhibit 1).
Because adventure
games were relatively unknown in the Maritimes, the owners believed
it would be necessary to create awareness and subsequent demand for
this type of leisure activity. The primary marketing area was
identified as the entire region within a one hour's drive from the
centre of the city. The marketing section of the business plan
originally provided for $2,000 to be spent on advertising before the
Park opened. $400 monthly was provided for after operations had
begun. Lisa and Sue hoped to attract the "Yuppie" and business
population. Their intention was to make personal calls on
medium-sized and large businesses and try to promote the idea of
setting up inter/intra company challenge events. They also prepared
a list of individuals whom they intended to telephone to urge them
to get a team together to play the adventure game. In their market
research, the owners discovered that the affluent segments of the
population were tending to buy experiences rather than possessions
such as yachts and summer cottages. More and more, they preferred to
travel, white water raft, sky dive, etc. This shift in life style
would strengthen the Strategic Adventure Park's market position.
Because of the proximity of several major military bases, Sue and
Lisa also identified military personnel as a potential market, and
planned to encourage and attract inter unit competitions. They also
believed that the several universities in the area, with a combined
student population of over 20,000, would provide another source of
players. In order to increase business during slower work days,
Strategic Adventure Park would try to attract company socials and
sports teams to play "Capture the Flag". In addition, Lisa and Sue
planned to set aside certain days for particular groups such as
women's groups or stag parties. They would also encourage tournament
play on slow days. Each of these distinct markets would require a
separate advertising thrust.
The market plan
was prepared for a period from May 20 to September 30, 1989. This
covered the summer operating season. The game could also be played
in the winter, with participants wearing white camouflage clothing
when ground was snow covered. This scenario was not included in the
initial market plan.
Lisa and Sue
identified potential internal and external threats in the original
business plan. The possibility of an accident involving a player was
an internal risk which could not be ignored. Safety precautions had
to be an important factor in day to day operations. They also
recognized that there were external risks which had to be
considered. For some of the external risks, preventative measures
could be taken. For others, the owners could not influence the
outcome. For example, there was the possibility that the county in
which the Park was situated might introduce a law prohibiting the
use of air guns. To minimize this possibility, the owners approached
county officials before start-up, to acquaint them thoroughly with
the nature of these games and the safety precautions which would be
strictly enforced. Less could be done to prevent a potential
competitor, who operated a successful flag game 150 kilometers away,
from expanding his operation to a location near the Strategic
Adventure Park.
The owners
targeted a net profit after taxes of $10,000 but felt this was the
minimum profit which they should realize. Two projected income
statements were prepared for the business plan. The first was a
pessimistic version based on a volume of only 1,200 customers, i.e.
12.5% of capacity. The second statement was based on 35% capacity,
which would increase the customer volume to 3,320 for the season.
The first scenario produced a profit of $4,943 after taxes and a
partial repayment of the company's $12,500 start-up loan (Exhibit
2). The second scenario would result in a profit of $39,461 after
taxes and the full repayment of the bank loan (Exhibit
3).
A list of assets,
necessary to start operations, was prepared (Exhibit 4). These
included a tent, which would serve as the main gathering place for
customers when not playing the game, and a small trailer which would
house the office. Forty-two air pistols and eighty units of
camouflage clothing completed the list of major assets. Bids were
solicited from five possible suppliers. Based on this survey, it was
clear that an approximate investment of $25,000 would be
needed.
The owners
decided to incorporate their company in order to take advantage of
limited liability, ease of transferring ownership, future expansion
and the "permanence" attached to incorporation. Sue acquired 50% of
the shares by investing $4,500 and Lisa 40% by investing $3,000. A
further $12,500 in capital was raised through a loan with a local
commercial bank. A $5,000 entrepreneurial government grant was also
obtained. These contributions to capital were obtained from their
respective sources after a careful review of the business plan
prepared by the owners (Exhibit 5 - Opening Day Balance
Sheet).
The target
start-up date of May 20th proved to be overly optimistic. It was
difficult to find suitable property. Many areas prohibited the use
of air guns, and it was difficult to find terrain suitable for the
adventure park. They needed about 40 acres of land with potential
for parking. To properly accommodate the game, a combination of
wooded and open terrain was needed. Lisa and Sue finally found a
site that was within a 45 minute drive of the city. Another factor
which contributed to the delayed opening was the "red tape"
encountered at various levels of government. A building permit was
also required for washrooms and food service. Power had to be
brought in to the site. the location also needed approximately
$1,000 of leasehold improvements and work before opening day. The
park did not start operating until mid July, a delay of almost two
months.
It was late June
before Strategic Adventure Park finally launched its advertising
campaign. To advertise the Park, newspapers in three towns near the
proposed site were chosen as well as a Metro radio station.
Advertising in the Metro daily newspaper was ruled out because space
was too costly. Response to the local newspaper and radio
advertisements was disappointing.
A delay also
affected preparation of a colour flyer, which was needed before
direct mail advertising could begin. The flyer was not ready until
mid July. The printers required a telephone number for the brochure
but the telephone company would not issue a phone number until the
office trailer was located on the site. Because of the delay in
obtaining a suitable site, and consequently in setting up the
trailer, the direct mailing package to Metro businesses was almost
two months behind the scheduled date. When finally completed, the
direct mailing produced the greatest response of all advertising.
Even so, the number of calls during July and August was
small.
When the
anticipated minimum volume of players did not materialize, there was
no money left to advertise further. Besides advertising in the
media, Lisa's and Sue's business plan called for direct telephone
selling or another means of reaching potential customers. However,
little direct selling was actually undertaken. Lisa discovered that
neither she nor her staff had the time to carry out this activity.
People who were interested in playing the game telephoned the
Strategic Adventure Park number but, unfortunately, were seldom
connected with a knowledgeable employee. Commonly during the month
of May, and frequently during the rest of the season, staff members
were unavailable to answer the telephone because of outdoor work
which required their attention. Callers were asked to leave a
message on the answering machine. Either the manager or one of the
owners would then call the potential customer back to try to make a
firm booking. Many telephone callers would not leave their number.
This arrangement was unsatisfactory, but sufficient funds were not
available to pay an additional staff member and thus correct the
situation. A full page article in the Metro daily newspaper appeared
at the end of August. It created a great deal of interest and
bookings improved substantially after this.*
As the operating
season progressed, a pattern developed. Almost without exception,
games were played only on weekends. It was found that the optimum
number of players per team was 20 (minimum number of players
required was 10). Because "no shows" could result in a game being
cancelled for lack of sufficient players, a deposit was required to
help prevent this from occurring.
During the
summer, four more adventure games opened in the catchment area.
These games were similar to "Capture the Flag". The playing fee and
the amenities were also very similar. However, the Strategic
Adventure Park site, by all accounts, was more attractive and
challenging to the players. The terrain offered more variety and
contributed to a more interesting game. It was difficult to assess
whether the new competition had a significant effect on retarding
the growth of the business. Nonetheless, Lisa, the "on site" partner
was badly demoralized by this turn of events. She did not attempt to
revise the marketing plan.
Neither
owner-manager was available for the entire operating season. Sue was
involved in another business located in Ontario and, consequently,
was unavailable to participate in day to day operations. Lisa worked
full time in the city at another job and could therefore give the
business her full attention only on weekends and in the evening.
Because of these other commitments, the owners budgeted for, and
hired, a full time manager for $1,800 per month beginning in May.
There was also a full time worker hired at the $4.25 per hour
minimum wage. Since it took three staff members to run a game, the
owner-manager who resided in Metro had to be there on
weekends.
The staffing
situation was marred by friction between Lisa (the owner who was
available part time) and the full time manager. By the end of
August, the relationship between the two had deteriorated to the
point that the manager had resigned and Lisa became personally
responsible for much of the work previously done by the
manager.
* September and October weekends were
fully booked.
The original
business plan was based on the staff running two games a day. After
gaining some experience by operating a few games, it became clear
that the same staff could not safely run two games in this time
period. The owners decided that there was not sufficient cash flow
to add more staff and that the low volume of players did not justify
the extra expenditure.
At the end of the
season when Sue, the absent co-owner, returned to Metro, the two sat
down to discuss and evaluate the business. Strategic Adventure Park
had not attained its target profit of $10,000 The company broke even
only by ruthlessly slashing expenses when it was evident that
start-up was going to be delayed (Exhibit 6). For example, the full
time manager's salary was cut in half after the first month's
operation. Part time staff hours were reduced. Advertising expenses
were slashed from a projected $1,600 for the season ($400.00 per
month) to an actual $400 for the season. Both owners felt that, as
the season ended, it was necessary to identify why operating results
had fallen short of projections so that corrective measures could be
taken, and to decide whether they should continue operations through
the winter.
The issue of the
company's longer term prospects also had to be addressed. Sue and
Lisa felt there was cause for some optimism. They believed that
because of the game's success on the September and October weekends,
it was reasonable to assume the twenty-two weekends of the 1990 May
to September season would be fully booked if aggressive marketing
was begun before the May start-up. Taking into consideration long
weekends, and estimating that an average of 15 players would play
each game, the owners forecast that 1,380 players would participate
in the 1990 summer season.
Sue and Lisa were
determined to fully utilize their business' full potential. They
started by analysing its past performance.
EXHIBIT
1
STRATEGIC
ADVENTURE PARK BUSINESS
PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXHIBIT
2
PROJECTED INCOME
STATEMENT (Period from May 20 to September 30,
1989) Budgeted for only 40 people/day for 30 days
(1200 people)

EXHIBIT
3
PROJECTED INCOME
STATEMENT (Period from May 20 to September 30,
1989) Budgeted for 3320 people

EXHIBIT
4
STATEMENT OF
ASSETS

EXHIBIT
5
OPENING DAY
BALANCE SHEET

EXHIBIT
6
ACTUAL INCOME
STATEMENT AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1989 (May 20 -
September 30, 1989)

|