Wakulla WTP

[Caver95]

I would be happy to keep paying my $87 or what ever it is for my Family pass, then 4 of us could go dive it. Why should divers be so special to deserve an assraping to dive at tax payer owned site. Sally ward would need no improvements( there is a place to park 100yards away) nor would Wakulla, the state should allow us to dive on our property. End of discussion. I am glad to have access to emerald but the hoops one must jump threw to dive it are CRAZY.

[LiteHedded]

200*$80 = $16,000
1000*$20 = $20,000

Frankly, I'd probly take the 200 visitors. 1/5 of the people to deal with, and 80% of the profit. Realistically, I'd try raising the price on those 200 visitors and see if they'd pay $100 each, so I could do 1/5 the work and have the same profit.

But then again, I'm unaware of the statute that states private citizens have a right to use any and all state property like most in this thread seem to believe.

i hear area 51 has some cave on the property. I demand access

[jj1987]

i hear area 51 has some cave on the property. I demand access

Your state park pass is expired, so no.

[LiteHedded]

Your state park pass is expired, so no.

my FLORIDA pass expired.
nevada one is still good

[wingman]

I just pulled numbers out of my rear for that, I probably should have picked something more extreme like 100 visitors at $100 or 1000 at $20.

Good grief...are you being serious here? There is little difference bewteen this and what you posted before. Now the revenue maximizing price is about $54 and 612 divers. What we did with the survey is estimate demand with data from 150 divers. We are not using the model to develop a pricing strategy but, recognizing that the park is a public good, we are measuring the consumer (or taxpayer if you rather) benefit from allowing diving.

What are you trying to get across?

[jj1987]

Good grief...are you being serious here? There is little difference bewteen this and what you posted before. Now the revenue maximizing price is about $54 and 612 divers. What we did with the survey is estimate demand with data from 150 divers. We are not using the model to develop a pricing strategy but, recognizing that the park is a public good, we are measuring the consumer (or taxpayer if you rather) benefit from allowing diving.

What are you trying to get across?

Bill-

Mind sharing what that number means? About the only thing I learned from statistics class was finding the balance between the highest possible grade, while skipping as many days as possible, so forgive me.

I paid $65 to board a dive boat recently and get two 30 minute open water night dives, on top of a 4 hour drive down south, and a hotel. This isn't at all uncommon, nearly every day of summer, boats fill up at $60+ a piece for these dives, and cave divers are typically a lot more into diving (both financially and interest wise) than ow divers. For a cave dive somewhere like Wakulla, I would certainly pay more than the number you gave. Heck, Ginnie cost nearly half of the number given, as does JB.

I have a feeling most divers responded with the price that they feel they should pay since it's state land, rather than what they were WILLING to pay (and I bet it's lower than if JJ said "hey let's go dive wakulla this weekend, here's an RB80 and 3 scooters...")....do you agree or am I completely missing what your number meant? Just seems odd that most people wouldn't pay even the cost of tank fills to dive Wakulla...I mean two stages of bottom gas are going to run you more than what most people are willing to pay for the dive.

I certainly don't think the state should be using land funded my tax dollars to gain profit (and admittedly that's a personal view, I haven't researched the statutes and state constitution to see if they can or not), but I have a feeling most cave divers who filled the survey out misunderstood and/or misanswered the question.

[wingman]

Bill-

Mind sharing what that number means?

For a cave dive somewhere like Wakulla, I would certainly pay more than the number you gave. Heck, Ginnie cost nearly half of the number given, as does JB.

The median willingness to pay number was just that, in our data half the divers were willing to pay more and half less. Contingent valuation is not an exact science by any means. The purpose of the model is really not to price the resource but to measure the benefit divers get from the experience. What we are measuring is consumer surplus the difference between what you are willing to pay and what you actually have to pay, aggreagated across divers...you mention you would be willing to pay more then what the median price was...that is to say you would get some surplus from the dive if it were priced at that point. The price at wakulla would not be that price but might well be what you have to pay to dive emerald (i have dove there a bunch and frankly it is such a non event from a $ perspective i can't even remember what i pay to dive it). It is not the actual expenditure we are after but the value of the resource to divers. Our wtp question on the survey asked if you would be willing to pay $x to dive and so long as it was answered correctly by the diver, yes or no then we have useful data.

Just do a search on contingent valuation and you will get a ton of literature that discusses all of this in great detail.

[jj1987]

The median willingness to pay number was just that, in our data half the divers were willing to pay more and half less. Contingent valuation is not an exact science by any means. The purpose of the model is really not to price the resource but to measure the benefit divers get from the experience. What we are measuring is consumer surplus the difference between what you are willing to pay and what you actually have to pay, aggreagated across divers...you mention you would be willing to pay more then what the median price was...that is to say you would get some surplus from the dive if it were priced at that point. The price at wakulla would not be that price but might well be what you have to pay to dive emerald (i have dove there a bunch and frankly it is such a non event from a $ perspective i can't even remember what i pay to dive it). It is not the actual expenditure we are after but the value of the resource to divers. Our wtp question on the survey asked if you would be willing to pay $x to dive and so long as it was answered correctly by the diver, yes or no then we have useful data.

Just do a search on contingent valuation and you will get a ton of literature that discusses all of this in great detail.

I find it very interesting that over half of a group of cave divers aren't even willing to pay half of the admission price to disney world, universal studios, taking a family out to a nice dinner, a single skydive, UF vs FSU football game, etc to dive one of the most famous and extensive underwater caves in the world. I wouldn't expect many of them to be happy paying more than a state park pass, since it's on state land, but it's interesting that they wouldn't be even willing to pay more if that's the only way the state agreed to allow diving it.

Thanks for the time and effort on this, it certainly surprised me.

[wingman]

I find it very interesting that over half of a group of cave divers aren't even willing to pay half of the admission price to disney world, universal studios, taking a family out to a nice dinner, a single skydive, UF vs FSU football game, etc to dive one of the most famous and extensive underwater caves in the world. I wouldn't expect many of them to be happy paying more than a state park pass, since it's on state land, but it's interesting that they wouldn't be even willing to pay more if that's the only way the state agreed to allow diving it.

Thanks for the time and effort on this, it certainly surprised me.

An important factor is the availibility of substitutes for the particular experience in question. As one person put it...i can dive deeper and cheaper elsewhere (eg. the diepolders). We do not have the paper together at all yet and a lot of work has to be done to get to that point but we are on the way.

There also might be an issue with the sample i have...in order to make inferences to the population of all cave divers it is important that the sample be representative of the population. This sample came from just those cave divers who registered to dive jackson blue and not all cave divers have been to jb.

Has skydiving got that expensive? I used to pay $7 for a 30 second delay and thought that was expensive...

[Caver95]

I find it very interesting that over half of a group of cave divers aren't even willing to pay half of the admission price to disney world, universal studios, taking a family out to a nice dinner, a single skydive, UF vs FSU football game, etc to dive one of the most famous and extensive underwater caves in the world. I wouldn't expect many of them to be happy paying more than a state park pass, since it's on state land, but it's interesting that they wouldn't be even willing to pay more if that's the only way the state agreed to allow diving it.

Thanks for the time and effort on this, it certainly surprised me.

As soon as it becomes The ST. PETE TIMES Wakulla Springs I will pay a commercial rate, however the standard rate at state parks to cave dive is $10 a day, or a state park pass.
One can dive Indian Spring for A donation of $25. I am all for a tourist rate, but others might not like that.