National park visits are surging, and one firm is making unexpected millions
wsj.com
wsj.com
But the code my tax dollars paid for should be open source and the contract should be biddable periodically.
An endless monopoly is not right in my opinion.
And having transaction fees is a good way to try different models. Good ideas with aligned incentives should be celebrated.
Don’t forget, the alternative would’ve still been the traditional “pay some defense contractor millions to do a shitty job and then pay them millions more to improve it”
Now that we know this type of contract model works, and if people are bothered by the unexpected windfall, future contracts can be structured differently to taper off or something.
https://www.recreation.gov/permits/4251909
Application Fee: A non-refundable $9.00 lottery fee is required for each lottery application.
I went to the lottery a few times in Kanab and never got a permit. I've resigned myself to the fact that I'll probably never get one now.
I'm pretty sympathetic to the argument that these drawings should be extremely inexpensive ($1?) and there should be some transparancy where the fee goes.
Also not mentioned in the article - I'm most familiar with how Yosemite and the parks in the sierras do it, but in those parks for popular trails there's a 6-month-in-advance lottery system, but there's also something like 10% of the quota reserved for 1-day-in-advance walk-up tickets only. So you either have to win a lottery that favors the preppy planners, OR be willing to wake up in the middle of the night and stand outside a park office for a few hours until they open. Not perfect, but it gives some options.
See also: Comcast.
Why not just bill for design, building and roll out of the system and then monthly maintenance charges?
It's not like Booz Allen incurs a cost for each reservation made (or if it doesn't it's incredibly small). It's mostly fixed costs of setting up and maintaining the system.
[1] - https://archive.is/20230409014718/https://www.wsj.com/articl...