This has to do with valet parking on airports. These operations may be money losers for airports, even though they are popular with the traveler.
If a valet operation takes up the most expensive parking spaces in the airport, those that are closest to the terminals, then they end up competing with their own self park. At least that the argument. I don’t really understand it, however, because if a person normally pays $25 a day to park in self park and you charge $35 a day for the same space parked by a valet, what’s the problem?
I can of course see one issue that needs to be finessed — that is that if the valet operation blocks out say 200 spaces for valet, and the garage fills with self park but not valet, then those unused valet spaces could cost some revenue. However, it would seem that they could make the valet area fluid enough to cover this issue.
If the cost of the valet portion of the operation is more than the $10, charge $40 or whatever it takes to cover your costs. By the way, you should be able to get more cars into a valet operation than in regular parking because you can stack park based on when a person is scheduled to return. And if they can’t make a profit at $10 or $15 a car to park it valet, turn the operation over to a professional valet company and let them do it. I’m sure there are some that would kill to get the job of parking cars at $15 per.
JVH
2 Responses
Ok, but what if you fill your closer spots to the door with valet and the customer doesnt want to walk from self park nor pay the premium for valet so they park at an off site lot where they provide a shuttle to the lot? Then they get door to door service and dont pay a premium. Then you lost the valet and the self park because your valet spots are taking up the spots closest to the door.
HUH? Who would put the valet cars nearest the door — Why not put them in the most inappealing part of the garage — and set up a ferry service to take the valets back and forth.