Is ‘Revenue Control’ an


Oxymoron? from Page 16


owner, I don’t care ...” A “Bonzo the Chimp” system would have met his criteria (no offense, Bonzo), and this was the president of a national parking company! Today, PARCS are asmuch about datamining as they are rev-


enue control.Reconciling thedata andthen using thatdata tobet- termanage, operate andmaximize the revenue potentials based on that data are what should really be considered as a PARCS is purchased. Iwas able to sell 1,225monthly passes in a 640-space facility


at aNewYorkCity area hospital simplybydatamining andunder- standing howto assign parking. Owners, take note! Each PARCS manufacturer has propri-


etary software tomake its hardware and reports function. You do notbuy a FederalG89Gatewith anAmanoTD, collecting the tick- etwith aWPS POF unit using Skidata revenue-reporting software, running on an S&B controller. When youbuy a system, you are entering into a 15-yearmar-


riagewith yourmanufacturer.Donotbuy a systemsimplybecause it is the “flavor of the month” being supported by the current operator.Maybe nextmonth your operator will be someone dif- ferent, but youwill still be the owner! Owners, develop a relationship with your manufacturer.


After all, you have just invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in a system to control and count your dollars. Other than my wife and children (and I still have to ask for the change back from my chil- dren), who else are you going to trust for the next 15 years counting and reporting yourmoney? I am sorry to say this,


but operators have an agen- dawhen recommending equipment. (See the sidebar nearby.) Training! I repeat, Training.Oh, have Imentioned Training?


None of us in a stable state ofmind would get on the new Airbus that carries 800passengers flownby apilotwhose “training”was a few hours playing NintendoWii’s “WWII Aces.”Well, the same is true on your PARCS. The bigger the facility, themore volume of vehicles per day,


the complexity of rates and validations, and the almost unlimited tenant-landlord lease deals as they relate to monthly parking require specific training and reoccurring training on that particu- lar PARCS software and systemin the facility. Simply because the operator runs the same brand systemon


the other side of town, the next city over, or somewhere in its overall national network does not mean the operator has the knowledge.That knowledge resideswith themanager of the facil- ity, and it is not a transferable item. Even how an operator audits the system is different from one manufacturer to the next. The reports are different; accessing the reports requires knowledge and skills; and detecting administrative changes in each systemis a learned skill! Aside fromthe daily (transient)money, themonthly portion


of the systemis of crucial concern.Owners, your building-access control systemretrofitted to open and close parking gates is noth- ingmore thanmental gyrations. You can use the same access card; just use a parking system to control the parking gates and the


18 JANUARY 2009 • PARKING TODAY • www.parkingtoday.com


Operatorsmay have an agenda when recommending PARCS:


• Sometimes it is financially beneficial to them, but at the owner’s expense.


• Sometimes it is economically advantageous to the operator over their competitors based on the systemconfiguration and reporting capabilities.


• Sometimes the operators have their own in- house service department (read that as profit center).


• Sometimes there simply needs to be an opportunity for plausible deniability when an independent audit is done.


building systemto control doors, elevators andHVAC. The parking operator doing the monthly invoicing from a


“As long as the gates go up and down and I don’t get complaints from the customers or the property owner, I don’t care ...”


central national or regional office is an illusion of revenue control. (It is, however, a profit center for an operator.) In 32 years, I have never seen an invoice froma centralor regional office open a gate. It is the on-site PARCS that should control the card access and determine if the card is paid for. Systems today do have complete A/R accounting software andinvoicing –but that now makes your operator’s cor- porate invoicing system obsolete (maybe an agenda issue?). The monthly pay- ment should be posted at that system and contained in that system that controls the gates, and you, the facili- ty owner, should also own and control the accounting


documents.Thatmakes lifemuch easierwhen youwant to change operators as all of the records and history are at your site and owned by you. Use credit cards on file, electronic funds transfer, even online


site-specific web-based payment applications – anything to get cashmoney out of the facility.What youpay inbank fees for cred- it cards is more than offset by labor cost to countmoney, trans- portmoney and replace “manipulate/lost”money. In the end, only three people willmake the difference as to


howwell the PARCS performs: • The on-sitemanager. • The owner and his amount of direct involvement in the


facility. • Themanufacturer’s local service personnel. Any one weak link and you have a poor system. If two of the


three links are weak, then you have compromised the system integrity and revenue control is simply an illusion. Is there more?Of course. I have only scratched the surface


and not even deep enough to require a Band-Aid. I amsure oth- ers are seeing blood gushing, but that’s a subject for another arti- cle or eight or ninemore of them!


Dennis Cunning is a consultant in revenue control. He can be reached at dlc_park@ix.netcom.com.


PT


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67