AIBU - children's ticket prices

[LassLassLass]

I know this isn't a new problem, but am I alone in being completely boggled by the prices of children's tickets for events/activities/attractions? Some examples - some Santa events cost well over £30 per child near me at Christmas. We're looking at planning a trip to London from the north later this year - it's £39.95 per child for the Warner Bros Harry Potter experience in London. My friend found out that it's £29.00 for Lego Land (£58 on the gate!). And it costs at least £20 to see Frozen in the West End.

There's apparently 4.3 million children in the UK living in poverty. Food bank use is through the roof. I grew up in poverty myself, so am very familiar with the free museums (in some areas) and events that children can attend. I am aware of the benefits of taking a picnic, looking for discount vouchers, taking public transport, and other tips and 'hacks' that can mean a cheaper day out. It just seems so wrong to charge such a high price for events, meaning some children will simply never have any chance of attending...AIBU?

It’s harsh that these are expensive, but they are also huge attractions with absolutely loads of things to do and are eye-wateringly expensive to run, so they charge accordingly. They’re businesses, not public services or charities. They exist to make as much money as possible. That’s capitalism for you. It’s shit but what else would you expect? Capitalism sucks.

Museums, galleries, national parks etc should absolutely be free to enter and subsidised by the government and through donations - everyone should have an equal right to culture and history and science and to have equal opportunity to experience them and learn from them. But I don’t think you could really argue that of a theme park.

(£20 for a West End theatre seat, regardless of who sits in it, is frankly a bargain when you consider the cost of running a West End theatre and staging a show. It’s insanely expensive to do anything in central London because rents for businesses are sky-high.)

I don’t vote Tory; but I would have thought OP would be better concentrating on the idea that benefits and/or NMW should be at a reasonable level, so that people have the basic needs for food, shelter, clothing, warmth, health and education met; and they aren’t living in poverty! Long term, a good diet and education will hopefully mean they have better health and prospects in their adult life!

If children are hungry and cold most of the winter; a day out at a theme park is neither here nor there!

The UK has lovely beaches and woodlands, fantastic national trust and english heritage attractions more affordably priced, lakes and mountains, and we think kids are missing out because legoland and west end shows are expensive

I agree with this. Kids don't always appreciate expensive stuff. My dd went to Harry Potter when she was 25 and paid for herself. I'm a wicked cruel mother.

I always like a good debate but I really struggle to understand OP’s point.
Companies decide to produce a show / build a theme park / open a cultural venue / etc. They will define the entrance price based on what it costs them vs how much people are willing to pay.

This is capitalism, yes.
Some posters seem to use « capitalism » as a swear word but is the alternative? The state defines what attractions should be available and at what price? The price might be cheaper then but do you really think the attractions will be as interesting and innovative? Basically preventing people from enjoying something because others can’t afford to?

Also, OP are you going to start threads about everything that is not the same for everybody:
Some children are fed healthy hole cooked food.
Some children have parents who read to them.
Some children have parents who don’t smoke inside the house.
Some children have a garden.
Some children still have both parents alive.
etc etc
and at the end:
Some children are bought tickets to expensive activities.

Doesn’t it put things in perspective?

Without capitalism and charging prices that enough people are prepared to pay, a lot of these things wouldn't exist anyway (unless the government was convinced that there was enough prestige/ cultural value to invest in them)

If running costs aren't met, these venues would go bust and no one benefits.
Is it fair that some people miss out on everything? No. Even the majority of people doing decently do some kind of prioritising on time/ money to do things and no one could do everything anyway.

Would it be great if it was in the curriculum (and funded!) so that every child got to experience the theatre, yes... although some people would argue that in a world of child poverty that subsidy could be better spent elsewhere.

The state defines what attractions should be available and at what price? The price might be cheaper then but do you really think the attractions will be as interesting and innovative?

Reminds me of going on holiday as teenager with my parents in the 80s to communist Yugoslavia (now Croatia)
There were about half a dozen restaurants in the resort but they all had the same menu! Just depended which view you wanted that evening