DOC to get $76 million boost in funding.

11–18 of 18

  • more about foreigers paying more on DOC bookings
  • Holly crap. The GWs are already going up to ~$70 a night down here. What will tourists get charged now? $80? $90?
    This post has been edited by the author on 12 May 2017 at 13:30.
  • in tasmania they are paying $500 for a two night walk, at three capes, in basic huts, includes local transport at either end
  • Is $11.4 million a lot for an online booking system? That's probably on average around 100 full time qualified tech workers for a year, which I'm sure wouldn't make up everything for building it. The allocation surely includes hardware and licensing and corporate overheads, but I also wonder what sort of booking system they're expecting for that amount.
  • Seems like a lot to me, my guess the booking system would have to be integrated into a archaic database which would make it exceedingly complicated and cumbersome to code.
  • old databases can be imported into new database software... that wont be the issue, and this is about new data being created not about referencing old data. The new system may be a lot more elaborate than the current system given the added complexity of sorting out overseas people from local ones and trying to minimise people getting around the system, assuming they are going to try and minimise it. DOC may have had to go to an external software development company to get the software they need and that will up the cost.
    This post has been edited by the author on 13 May 2017 at 07:16.
  • They already have at least 3 different booking systems! This is getting ridiculous, but I know of a few people in the IT industry who will see this as very good news, more money to produce broken shitty booking software ^^ And the 3 capes track is 4 days / 3 nights (but only 2 capes). And there is still a free campsite, maintained by Parks and Wildlife that allows you to do most of the walk for free. But it still is completely an environmental disaster (lots of vegetation cutting to create a tourist attraction at a place that didn't see much use before), and bloody expensive. I didn't see a single foreign tourist on that track when I did it for free, most were aussies. So if you are keen to pay $170 per night to destroy a national park and sleep in a "hut hotel" that don't provide food or bed sheets, sure, go on. But this is not conservation at all. On another note, national parks are not free in Tasmania, entrance is $60 for 2 months, maybe DOC should look on that side to make more money too… I wouldn't be against paying everyone paying for park entrance in NZ, instead of having a hut pass and hut tickets, and having most huts free. At least this would stop that stupid idea that huts that don't produce enough fees should be removed…
  • $11m just sounds like a lot to me, especially as booking systems are hardly a new thing. It's not as if they're inventing something that's never been done before. It really depends on what scope that money's for, though. Start pulling hundreds of staff away from their day-jobs for testing, feedback and training, and have them all coding their time to "booking system replacement", and maybe it reaches $11m quite rapidly.
If this post breaches forum rules, please flag it for review.
11–18 of 18

Forum The campfire
Started by militaris
On 11 May 2017
Replies 17
Permanent link