Yet Another Cutback Returned! [Archive] - The DIS Discussion Forums

d-r

04-10-2002, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by gcurling

Early Entry
Daily shows (Hunchback, B&B, etc.)
9pm Future World closing
11am World Showcase Opening
Key lockout service
Free valet parking
In room package delivery
Year round operation of Timekeeper and CoP

I thought that the daily shows were back to normal, and during spring break they added in extra shows. May have that wrong.

They've posted the May hours over at go.com, and future world is closing at 9 (but I know that things like Test Track are open until 10). They have world show case opening at 11 every day in May.

The key lockout thing and valet parking doesn't bother me personally, I don't drive to wdw, but I can understand the liability. I would like to have my package sent to my room though, that sort of bothers me. If enough people went to timekeeper and cop they would be open - I'm not sure that those two are 9-11 cutbacks so much as lack of interest by the masses.

As for early entry, who knows but I personally doubt it will come back. Maybe some real "surprise mornings" at the MK during the busier times, but beyond that, I don't think the use justified the cost.

raidermatt

04-10-2002, 11:55 AM

Reopening Port Orleans and once again serving breakfast at Tony's and the like would also be examples of re-establishing revenue centers and not bringing back customer service cuts.

Point taken, but nonetheless, many site these things as cuts and lump them together with the things you listed. So I guess Mr. Pirate's message would apply only to those who considered restaurant and resort closings to be cuts.

Lesley

04-10-2002, 12:14 PM

In room package delivery has been gone since at least Nov. 1999...when we stayed at CSR we had to pick up all our packages at the gift shop. I know we had packages delivered directly to our room back in 1994....so I have no idea at what point they stopped that.

I'm glad to see that Flame Tree is once again open....it was a very good place for a bite to eat. Now if only they'd bring back the Adventureland Veranda! (Which was closed a long time ago) The food there was also very good. I'd also like to see Tony's open for breakfast...we've always wanted to try it and never got the chance.

Oh, and they need to bring back the Satay and Pad Thai at the chicken shop in AK's Asia! :)

Bob O

04-10-2002, 12:36 PM

Im glad they are starting to return the items that they cut back. Maybe they have now learned that they have over-reacted in the harsh cutbacks they made.
The only ones that concerned me were the reduced park hours/reduction of show schedules and the most important, the return of EE.
I will go back even with the cutbacks that were made but i wont stay on site without EE!!
I cant say the rest./resorts cutback's would have bothered my but park hours/shows reduced and the loss of EE would have been affected my family greatly so while im happy that things are going back to normal i wont be pleased till all hours are brought back, the whole show scedules are resumed and EE is brought back!!!

Galahad

04-10-2002, 12:46 PM

How are you making the distinction between "revenue centers" and "customer services"? WDW employs a lot of financial analysts. One of their raison d'etre is to continually calculated the return on investment (ROI) for every thing added or removed. There is potential revenue attributed to the addition of a new Hunchback show just as there is with the addition of a new ice cream cart. Not all of the revenue at a shop or food cart is attributed only the the addition of that cart but to the attractions associated with it. Shows and such were removed when attendence went down because the ROI ratio for them was lower, not non-existent . If the shows had no bearing on profits, they would never come back. If EE don't come back it is more likely that they weren't even profit-neutral, let alone profit-generating. If EE is an added inducement to staying on-site, it's cost must be weighed against the margins being made at the resorts. If removing EE doesn't reduce the number of on-site guests, or if keeping EE is a drain on the revenues from the resorts then it doesn't make sense to keep it. The ads say that "Magic Happens", but there is a lot of boring business stuff that goes on behind the scenes to make the Magic possible.

Like Peter, I am happy for the things that have returned and am not at all surprised that they have. I suspect that the things that don't return will be replaced by other new things at some point. 5 or 10 years from now, somebody will be angry that those new things are being removed and crying that the Magic is gone.

Bob O

04-10-2002, 12:59 PM

theDscoop if i have a mont in my honor i would perfer Dec.!!! I love the x-mas decorations and the samller crowds( beggars will be choosers).
Of course with the cutbacks and things be returned you can tmake all people happy and i will always have something to whine about. It just that we only go every 2 yrs so i put a high priority on time spent in the parks and being a commando in the parks i want to do as much as possible in the time i have and can ctach up on sleep when i get home. Thats why parks hours/EE are so important.

All Aboard

04-10-2002, 02:04 PM

I doubt that the analysts are reducing revenue in their calculation when they determine the saving associated with cutting Hunchback from 7 to 5 days. I suspect that they assume the consumer will not attribute any marginal utility reduction to the number of shows. And if they do, their bosses will smile, pat them on the back and ask them how much they enjoyed their finance 101 class.

My designation of "revenue" center was one that has it's own P&L. A restaurant, a shop. Clearly there is cross revenue potential for each and every service or decision, it's just not likely on the radar screen for some of the decisions.

EE, of course, is a deeper analysis and they'd be wise to consider the loss of revenue. Perhaps they did. But, if EE was a loser, then it would be considered a customer service perk in my book, and an elimination we won't likely see return.

I'm not arguing the fiscal responsibility of the cuts. Just the fact that they have a way of remaining permanent. I've seen it many, many times. Not just with WDW, but in all industries.

I understand your argument. Believe me. It's what I do for a living. If you were to put my title in layman's terms it would be "chief expense cutter." Right now, my kind is in high demand. If I were on the WDW payroll, I'd be offering up alot more than what we've seen from them. But I don't work for WDW, I'm a consumer, a long time consumer... so my perspective is much different when I look at them.

btw, WDW saw the error of their ways and has now corrected the hours for Future World. It's back to the 10-7 reduced version. World Showcase is showing 11-9, I give it another 48 hours before they spot it and correct it to 12-9.

Panthius

04-10-2002, 02:35 PM

In room package delivery has been gone since at least Nov. 1999...

When we stayed at the Contemporary in January of 2001, we had package delivery to our room.

Not sure what to say about the cutbacks and restorations, although I do know that there is a nice chart in the Birnbaum's WDW 2002 guide on page 46 which lays out the attractions added each year since the Magic Kingdom opened. It seems that since around the time Eisner had taken charge, more attractions have been added...by a long shot over any previous time. Of course there is the argument over the quality of these additions...

Panthius

All Aboard

04-10-2002, 03:33 PM

However, one must reasonably assume that it no longer makes fiscal sense or it would not have been discontinued. Why must one? That implies that a company that has failed to move the needle on its stock price for the past 5 years never makes a financial misdecision. That's one heck of an assumption.

its funny to see something developed under the Eisner regime with such a fervent following.Why is it funny? I'd add these:

Tower of Terror
Splash Mountain
Festival of the Lion King
Voyage of the Little Mermaid
The Great Movie Ride
Star Tours
Hunchback of Notre Dame: A musical adventure
Fantasmic!
Tapestry of Nations
Reflections of Earth
Food & Wine Festival
Holidays around the World
Flower and Garden Festival
SpectroMagic

I'd go on, but it would get boring. There have been PLENTY of things added during the Eisner Regime with fervent followings. But honestly, only a couple of these were added after Frank Wells' death in 1994.

DolphinBound

04-10-2002, 04:41 PM

The May hours on the official WDW site show World Showcase as opening at 11 a.m. instead of 12 noon. May be a typo, but if not, they gave back an hour.

All Aboard

04-10-2002, 04:43 PM

No, I don't at all believe that WDW would cut EE if it were making money. But not every single offering on a stand alone basis MUST make money. That's the nature of customer perks, the extras that enhance the experience and make people want to come back. I doubt EE made money in 2000, but it was a booming year - hence it survived. In leaner times, expenses must be cut. EE was one of them. Will it return when things turn around? Why should it? Like you said, it was likely losing money. As a customer who made use of EE on a regular basis, I'm upset by the cut. Am I just barking?

No.

Last year we made long weekend trips to WDW in 1) mid Feb, 2) early Mar, 3) late Mar, 4) late Apr, all during peak season. Each year we stayed on-site. This year we will make NONE of those trips. Why not? Crowd levels are higher than we prefer and we cannot make use of EE to strategize. End result, WDW lost me as a customer for a portion of the year. I am likely in the minority, and I know that. No doubt, WDW made a projection of revenue change from all sources (that spent in restaurants and shops during EE, revenue from folks choosing on- vs. off-site, and those who based their travel solely on EE.) Granted, maybe not much fell into the latter categories, but I'm an example of at least a few bucks.

Peter Pirate

04-10-2002, 05:26 PM

Remember that it was reported that WDW management was none to happy with the proliferation of non-Disney Resort guests availing themselves of the 'EE'. Yes this could have been monitored and policed but at a cost (an additional cost on top of the loss they were already experiencing as a so called perk). Therefore the 'EE' had literally become an 'EO' (early opening) and no longer what they had intended.

I agree with scoop's sentiments that they blew it with 'EE' when it became 'EE' instead of 'Surprise Mornings'...It became a given, not a perk and worse yet a given for everybody and anybody...

I truly hope they can bring back a perk of some type for Resort guests only, but I don't believe it will be as broad or as scheduled as EE was...
:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

Bob O

04-10-2002, 11:24 PM

Disney cut EE to make money and they know that the disney apologists will just stand back and take it up the rear while saying thank you may i please have another!!! They made a decision IMHO that they will make more money by the cutback and their apologists will take it in stride and buy their BS reasoning!!! And this shows their lack of concern for the guest experience and they no longer feel if have to"wow" the guests but can get by on the good will they have built up over the years!!
I for one wont stay on site without EE which wont bankrupt the company by any stretch of the imagination but will cost them some small amount of money when i visit. But in comparsion i will stay on site at Universal as they still offer great perks for their on-site guests which disney doesnt and their is alot of competition for the hotel/food dollars in the area. We always stayed at a deluxe hotel and ate all meats on wdw property but that wont happen in the future unless EE is returned because without it i dont think the bang is their for the money spent!!
If non-disney guests were using EE that is disney's own fault/problem, the same as their inability to make sure only hotel guests use their pools, shows a lack of security!

Killer Fish

04-10-2002, 11:43 PM

Disney cutting Early Entry is the reason that for the first time in my life (20 Years) my family is not coming to Disney World for Spring Break. My family decided that next Spring Break they are going to do a cruise. They are tired of the cutbacks. They always come over Spring Break so they are stuck with the crowds. They used EE to get the major rides done quickly and just enjoy the shows and minor attractions for the rest of the day. They would get up at the crack of dawn. If the park was listed as opening at 7:30 they were out on the bus stop by 6:30. It was fun for them. Yesterday they went to Epcot and it didn't even open until 8:30 in the morning. This was crazy for them. They actually woke up and had breakfast at Old Port Royale something that they have not done since EE started. My point is that some people like my family may be so pissed off that they decide not to come back.

Another Voice

04-11-2002, 12:09 AM

“[Fast Pass] is a non-revenue generating Perk for the WDW guest. It cost quite a bit to develop and even more to implement and staff. Yet, its only return is in visitor goodwill.”

Actually, no.

Fast Pass was cost justified on the additional traffic to shops, restaurants and other attractions the process was supposed to generate. In the bluntest of terms – if people are standing in line they are not out spending money. Having 6,000 guests waiting in line for two hours at ‘Pirates’ doesn’t add anything to the bottom line.

While it was assumed that many guests would use the “extra” time to visit other attractions, it was also assumed that many would also browse through nearby shops, have a quick meal or down a Coke. In reality, most people simply go wait in other lines and far fewer are spending additional money. You can also notice how the initially enthusiasm (and expansion) of Fast Pass has dramatically tapered off over the last year.

While opening capacity sensitive revenue generators can be seen as undoing cut backs (“Look Mommy, another place to spend money!”), the true guest goodwill comes from services that provide the visitors with enjoyment without such a blatant grab for money. The tangible you-get-what-you-pay-for feel is better suited to Las Vegas and tacky carnivals, not a Disney park. While I enjoy bar-b-que, I would much rather watch the submarines prowling through their lagoon once again.

kenjean

04-11-2002, 06:37 AM

Add our name to the list of former Disney resort guests that won't stay on-site now that EE is eliminated. We loved it because of our young daughters. I would be curious to know how many people with small children made use of EE, I think those are the people that benefited the most. It seems that to get an accurate count of people that took advantage of it would be easy to find: take the gate counts for the early entry period and subtract out the reservations for character breakfasts at that time.

A note on fastpass, we were in Animal Kingdom Sunday and noticed that fastpass had been added to Premivial Whirl. Now there's a good use of new technology. BTW, while we were in Dinorama the games were completely empty.

barreloflaughs

04-11-2002, 08:30 AM

FastPass drastically eliminates such inhuman suffering. And its free.

Small point here....instead of "free" howzabout "included in the price of admission". I'll be quiet now. ;)

carl
barrel of laughs

JeffJewell

04-11-2002, 08:56 AM

...the mandate of "four FastPass rides per park by..." some date that slips my mind, at the moment? I believe, at the time, there was no little consternation at the idea of putting FastPass on both Maelstrom and the Land's boatride.

It doesn't seem that many folks realize this about using FastPass: it absolutely guarantees that you will wait longer to ride than you would if you'd just get in the line (there are small windows of exception to this rule near the beginning of the day).

By putting all the most popular rides on FastPass, by limiting the number of FastPasses available to you, and by inflating the amount of actual time you wait to go on those rides, Disney keeps vacationers in their parks longer. FastPass was a much cheaper way to accomplish that goal than adding an expensive "must-do" ride.

It's true that some knowledgeable guests can milk FastPass for all it's worth, just like some knowledgeable guests do with every other aspect of Disney.

But FastPass was not installed to ensure adequate degrees of separation between the 'Scoop party and moist Waconians. If the numbers didn't say that FastPass would result in more P.L.U.S.H. (Pockets Loaded? Unload Some Here) sales and less time for guests to jump over to IOA, and all this at the lowest possible capital outlay, it never would have happened.

This was not a Magic decision, this was a Money decision.

Jeff

larworth

04-11-2002, 09:59 AM

FastPass

I think they saw FastPass as a potential win-win situation. It had the potential to both increase guest satisfaction and add revenue. The latter was obviously an important consideration given how many times spend/guest and FastPass has been used in the same sentence. It sounds like it has done both, to varying degrees.

It is interesting to think about overall guest satisfaction ratings. The enlightened group that uses it surely enjoys more attractions per day than those that don’t. I can see why they are positive. The group that doesn’t has to be getting less value, but it just isn’t as obvious to them. I mean you can’t say these people aren’t interested in doing the rides or they wouldn’t be standing in 60 minute plus lines.

Changes in Perks

I don’t expect them to knowingly give away value. I’m sure they assume every perk they provide generates enough positive goodwill somewhere to eventual pay for itself. However, the purchasing decisions here are pretty complex, and there must be hundreds of services/costs someone thinks generates a return, that in reality does not. If an analysis can indicate otherwise, than they should make adjustments. I’d rather have them reinvest these costs into another service/perk that was more valued by more customers.

I also don’t think you have to listen to too many conference calls to understand that Disney has been squeezing the Parks to deliver better and better profitability. They’ve been on a pretty OPEN cost cutting mission for a couple of years now. If the parks were underperforming assets, and too much value was being given away, that would be one thing. It’s when the longterm best interest of the parks might be being compromised to compensate for other shortfalls that I get antsy.

Unfortunately, we don’t have much hard DATA to go on. We have their stated strategy (watch the cash, flow), our lists, and some very broad unit results. We have to be careful about jumping to too many conclusions, but we do know Park Division profitability has been steadily rising. Operating margins in 1994 were just under 20% (not shabby). By 2000 they were over 24%. On a macro level costs have increased at a slightly slower pace than revenues.

In 2001, margins dropped to 23.7%. An underperforming DCA and 9-11 were some big negatives, and it was understandable they would tighten the belt further to try to mitigate these impacts. In fact, if we look at Q1 results (full 9-11 effects) margins were only 13%. No, they weren’t in danger of going out of business, but a big hit. It will be interesting to see Q2 results in a couple of weeks. Remember, they have trumpeted that once attendance returns margins will be even higher than before.

JeffJewell

04-11-2002, 10:03 AM

FastPass, especially at Epcot and AK, allows you to spend more time exploring the non-ride attractions such as Pangani or Morocco, during time which you would otherwise be waiting in line staring at walls ...I agree that this is a fringe benefit of FastPass (you have a good memory... I suspect you're tossing me a bone mentioning Morocco specifically). But I'm a person who has never seen IOA, Universal Orlando, or SeaWorld (unless, of course, "SeaWorld" is what grew out of an Orlando area park called "Marineland," circa 1972).

I just think it's a little naive to declare that this fringe benefit eked out by nuts such as ourselves is the only reason, or even the main reason, for FastPass' existence, is all. It's the people who thought they could hit the "biggies" in the morning and then ride Spider-man all afternoon who now "have" to stay longer to see what they wanted... you and I would have still been there, anyway. Being able to take tiger pictures (I'm a Jungle Trek man, myself) instead of staring at walls is only a benefit if you're at all interested in taking tiger pictures, in the first place (and besides, it makes the details and pre-show elements now present in some queues like Dinosaur and Kali River Rapids just something you fly by... how long until those details are cut as non-value-added expenses [and those cuts defended on the "bottom line" basis by the same folks who once pointed out queue theme elements as something Magical Disney had over their competitors]?).

Hey, if they raised ticket prices by an order of magnitude, I personally might be able to find some good in it (I'd still be able to make a trip, every now and then, but an awful lot of people wouldn't, anymore... one-tenth the crowds might just be worth a five-hundred dollar ticket), but it could still be accurately described as a "blatant grab for money."

In the same way as saying "Primeval Whirl is an off-the-shelf ride exhibiting minimal Pixie Dust" does not mean that no one can ever possibly enjoy riding the thing, saying "Fast Pass was cost justified on the additional traffic to shops, restaurants and other attractions the process was supposed to generate" does not mean that no one can ever possibly benefit from using the system.

Jeff

PS:Very nice work Jeff Thank you. Words are fun.

Another Voice

04-11-2002, 10:53 AM

Basically what Jeff said…

Disney did not sink millions and millions into Fast Pass just so that the Scoop family might enjoy the gardens at the China pavilion. Its primary goal was to get people out of the lines because a) people don’t like waiting and b) they don’t spend money in line despite all the tests of the wandering drink & snack sellers. Certainly if the goal was simple to “improve guests satisfaction” all that money would have gone into creating Fire Mountain, Beastly Kingdom, and other MAJOR crowd pleasing attractions.

The intent of the project has turned out to be different than the actual results – people want to go on rides more than they want to shop. That isn’t a problem with Fast Pass, it’s a problem with the current management’s mindset that view customers as nothing but mobile wallets looking for places to spend money. If the typical guest can outsmart the spreadsheet builders, then all is good and right with the world.

It is still interesting that “business motives” is used only as a rationalization for the latest budget cut, but that all other activities are made out the be some sort of charitable gift bestowed upon us by a benevolent corporation. From its outset Fast Pass was meant to be a profit making operation, both by freeing up guests to spend money and by improving the guest experience. Out here, FP is marketed to counter the public’s second reason for not visiting Disneyland – the lines.

And pending the final tests here as well, you’ll see all the various ways in which “premium Fast Passes” will be used to generate more money through vacation package sales, ticket upcharges and other incentives. Yes, Fast Pass does increase a guest’s satisfaction level. And they are expected to pay for that one way or the other.

P.S. – the money issue isn’t with the parks, it’s with the company. Mr. Larworth, check out the returns from the Studio group (somewhere between 4% and 6%).

DOPEY44

04-11-2002, 11:16 AM

Whats bad about standing in line? Rather stand an hour than be at work for 5 minutes!
Why is everybody is such a hurry?
Look around.
Talk to people.
The money spent on Fast Pass systems should have been put into entertainment.
You want to generate money: with a third of the people in line, the parks capacity
could go up, and each one paying $50 to get in.
Guest have been able to do the parks in one day rather than two. You should want to
keep the guests in the parks for as long as you can. Thats how you generate $$$$.

Galahad

04-11-2002, 12:31 PM

It is still interesting that “business motives” is used only as a rationalization for the latest budget cut, but that all other activities are made out the be some sort of charitable gift bestowed upon us by a benevolent corporation. From its outset Fast Pass was meant to be a profit making operation, both by freeing up guests to spend money and by improving the guest experience.

Yes. So decisions about what to add should be dependent on sound business analysis. Even in the "good old days" (whenever that was) Magic was not being created at the expense of profit but as a vehicle for profit.

But.

Certainly if the goal was simple to “improve guests satisfaction” all that money would have gone into creating Fire Mountain, Beastly Kingdom, and other MAJOR crowd pleasing attractions.

Having a great new E-ticket attraction won't improve guest satisfaction if the less obvious issue of people movement is ignored in the process. Guest experience depends on the whole package right? If I can't get onto Fire Mountain and still have time for lunch my guest experience won't be all that great.

raidermatt

04-11-2002, 01:04 PM

This has to be one of the most bizarre "discussions" I've seen on this board.

Does it really matter whether the primary reason for FP was increased guest spending or increased guest satisfaction? Before putting it in, Disney felt it would do both. What is wrong with that? As Larworth said, it was a win-win situation. That is a good thing.

And clearly, they still think it has some value in at least one of those categories, since it is attached to the 21st century's crown jewel of E-tickets, Primivel Whirl.

If AV is right, and it doesn't impact revenues like they had hoped, does this mean it's inclusion with PW was solely for the pleasure of the guests? Nah, couldn't be.

While I want new E-tickets as much as anyone, I'm happy to trade one for Fastpass. Bottom line is it saves our group time in some of the longer lines. For us, the main benefit is we hit a few more attractions than we would have otherwise. Maybe we do shop a little more, I don't know, but what I do know is that we are much happier with FP than without it.

Does it keep some guests in the park longer? Maybe, but I could swear that I've read several recent posts that say Disney does NOT really want us in the parks, but instead want us leaving to go to DD. But now, the logic is reversed to say those guests don't go to DD, but instead get in their cars and drive to Universal? Which is it? Do they want us in the parks or not?

BobO- I wasn't quite clear on what your point was. Could you be a little more descriptive?

;)

larworth

04-11-2002, 01:04 PM

Thanks for the tip Mr. Voice. I did take a look at the performance of the other divisions.

(**/Sales)
Margin..........Historical..................First Quarter

25-30%......Cable Properties
20-25%......Parks Division.................Cable
15-20%......Consumer Products.........CP
10-15%......Broadcast (ABC)..............Parks
5-10%............................................Stu dios
<5%...........Studios..........................Broa dcast

I knew that 13% 1Q result for the parks was really bad. They'd be the same position as ABC use to be.

OK, so not new news. However, if we all want to have a real interesting discussion we ought to look at cash flow history (since that is the new mantra). It does make you pause and think a little.

JeffJewell

04-11-2002, 03:48 PM

My guest experience is betterI spend more time allows me more time...ahh, we're back to the ever-popular "if I like it, then it must be Magic--with a capital em, trademarked and copyrighted."

Point being, the mindset behind FastPass was precisely the mindset behind Pop Century: get more money out while putting less in.

I made this point (to no great success, I assure you) about the All-Stars: gigantic iconic theming with little or no connection to Disney is a poor direction for Disney. Oh, the cyber-beatings I took for such suggestions! But to describe the All-Stars, without mentioning exactly what the icons are, is to describe Pop Century. To prefer one or the other is a question of whether or not you like the icons they picked: a personal preference issue.

Similar point here: FastPass is the result of an effort to get more money out of the same number of pockets while avoiding making any capital investments in the park. Whether or not you find the silver lining in FastPass, this should set off some alarms about what investments in their future Disney cares about making.

If you want to enjoy using FastPass, or staying at the All-Stars, that's swell: I've done both, myself. But just as Pop Century took the blueprint of the All-Stars and turned it into something almost no one likes, you shouldn't be surprised when the FastPass blueprint gets turned into something almost no one likes. It's inevitable.

Jeff

Bob O

04-11-2002, 04:11 PM

Kenjean my family loved EE when are kids were small. Going to the MK during EE was great!!! Rides like Dumbo/Snow White/Peter Pan could be done with no waits several times, which is a godsend as kids are even more impatient than i am. You could also get great photo's of the charachters without everybody swarming and people in the backround who you didnt know!!! It was the best part of our day!!!!
I also think fastpass was created more with the idea of people spending money on food/trinkets than guest satifaction even though they did realize it would get get guests reaction. I dont really care for FP as i think it does make alot of lines longer and benefits the lazy at the expense of the commando's(im in that group) who will get to the park as early as possible to ride their favorites with little to no waits. Im glad though that at least disney does do the right thing and doesnt charge for it like Six Flags does!!!
dopey44 you might like standing in line and find it enjoyable but i dont!!!! And while fastpass may save waiting on one line it will lengthen the wait on numerous other lines.
riafermatt i would much perfer E-ticket rides/shows than fastpass!!! I could get alot more enjoyment out of a e-ticket ride/show than fastpass as i dont go when the parks are busy and lines are long. But the loss of EE truely diminshes the amount of time i have in the parks and the total enjoyment my family can have and why i wouldnt stay on site without EE. And why true magic is FOTL access when staying on site at Universal!!!!

raidermatt

04-11-2002, 04:18 PM

JeffJ, maybe I'm missing something, but I just can't follow your analogy.

To me, the only similarity between PC/AS and FP is in your opinion about the motiviation, profits.

Profits and guest experience are not mutually exclusive, are they?

I can understand your view that PC and AS do not enhance the guest experience, and lack the Disney "show", quality, themeing, whatever.

But forgetting whether or not it generates profits, FP DOES enhance the guest experience of anyone who chooses to use it, and it does not decrease it for anyone who chooses not to use it. (Unless someone thinks the kiosks are tacky or something?)

Again, the motivation to make profits can still produce things that enhance the guest experience. I understand the frustration involved in believing that Disney management feels the guest experience should only be improved when it can be tied to proifts. However, that does not mean that such decisions do not improve the guest experience, as FP has.

The problem comes when moves clearly do not enhance the guest experience, like the removal of EE, for example. Those decisions are debateable, but I just can't see FP being in the same vain.

Bob O

04-11-2002, 04:52 PM

Raidermatt If somebody goes to wdw and isnt aware of fastpass and doesnt use it then it can be a negative as they wait in longer lines. When i have used fastpass(granted slow times of the year) it was nice for that ride but i did think it made other lines longer and benefited people who come to the park later in the day(if FP is still avaible)
thedscoop from my experience(numerous times) the people i saw going to EE were riding rides and not eating!!! Few stores are open and few rest. So the people i saw went solely to ride the rides to avoid lines and the experience of being at the park with few people which is a great experience. When i went for EE my family didnt eat any breakfast but ate a early lunch and on thise days only ate 2 meals rather than 3. I believe EE was initially started to boost hotel occupancy rate which will make wdw more money, but they gave the people who used it a true perk, whats a better perk for a family with kids to ride dumbo with little or no wait, rather than at mid-day waiting maybe a hour or more!! With EE i felt i was getting true value out of my hotel experience, i was at the park earlier but it didnt result in any extra park purchases which is different i believe from FP which is intended to get you out of lines into shops/rests.

Another Voice

04-11-2002, 08:37 PM

Again, the intent behind Fast Pass (make more money) can be different than the result (I go on Space Mountain more). There’s nothing wrong with a plan that does both – actually it’s kind of what I hope for. It’s actually rather nice for Disney to come up with something that makes a trip to WDW more enjoyable instead of just more expensive. I also secretly hope that there remain a few good people with The Company. In my hopes, I see someone who thought FP was a great benefit for the guests and then fudged the spreadsheets just to get the project approved.

The only reason the goal of Fast Pass is important is because it will help us understand The Company’s next moves. Since it is not generating the revenues they want (according to rumor), something will have to be changed to make the financials works. You can see already by the suddenly halt to any new Fast Pass installations. If FP was done soley for the guest satisfaction then why wouldn’t something like ‘Dumbo’ get it? That is the one line that most people complain about (even a 30 minute wait with a small child can be torture). Knowing the thinking behind the FP concept you can see why that will never happen.

Already in Anaheim special Fast Passes have become part of the vacation packages. Perhaps this concept will be expanded; an extra $50 and you get 5 FP’s a day up front if you stay on property. That would be a major benefit to staying on property and might book a few more hotel rooms. See, the money thing again.

Believe me, not a lot happens in Disney that isn’t directly tied to revenues.

Bob O

04-11-2002, 11:15 PM

thedscoop I like EE more than Fast pass because it was a true and genuine perk for staying on site at a wdw property. It was a pure benefit for paying the higher price of staying on site and it was well worth it IMHO to be at the parks 1 1/2 hrs before they opened to the public, to get on alot of rides with no waits and see the characthers with no crowds and get decent pictures. It was a perk that made disney money and also benefited the guest if they chose to use it. Fast pass can save you some time on a few rides but it lengthens the wait on all of the other fast pass attractions and if guests arent aware of how the system works they can get really screwed.

JeffJewell

04-12-2002, 07:48 AM

...the reason I brought up the All-Stars and the Pop Century was to draw a parallel between the All-Stars and FastPass. I really don't think there can be much reasonable debate that the All-Stars were an attempt to cash in on the Disney name while avoiding the level of theming and detail (and associated expense) historically synonymous with that name. Despite the fact that the _intention_ was to cash in, quite a few people made the point that they personally wouldn't be able to stay on-site without the All-Stars. And there was enough "to" the All-Stars where they could justify a obvious reduction in Disney Standards.

The next logical step, from a business standpoint, was the Pop Century. Long-time posters/lurkers might remember, during the dark days of the All-Star Wars, some posts describing the likely next level of "Super Value" resorts. Compare some of those posts with some current posts suggesting that the PC makes the A-S's look like moderates, in comparison. Turns out that the canaries back in that coal mine had a valid point.

Same thing here. Despite the fact that the _intention_ of FastPass was to cash in, quite a few people make the point that their personal vacation is better now than without FastPass.

Fair enough.

But do you honestly think that FastPass is the last stop on this road? It's not. Do you believe that you'll be able to find the silver lining in whatever follows FastPass? Maybe, maybe not, just like there are still a few people who say they see "Disney Magic" in Pop Century.

There's an enormous difference between setting out to thrill and amaze the guest and ending up making some money along the way, and setting out to make all the money you can and ending up making some guests happy along the way. Money was always the grease that kept the machinery of the Magic going, but there is an enormous difference between defining your vision and making Roy go out to find the money to make it happen, and defining your budget and forcing the Imagineers to cut down a vision to fit under it.

If you want to justify Disney's decision making on the basis that the world has changed, we're a commoditized, lowest common denominator, Wal-Mart society, and Disney is just doing what every other business is doing to survive, I've got no problem with that.

But you can't reasonably make the argument "Disney is just doing what every other business is doing" and still talk about there being a "Disney Magic" anywhere but in your head.

I fully admit that this is a prime example of the "slippery slope" phenomenon, and everyone is going to define the exact point of "going too far" in a different place. The quote in my sig is there to make the point that, to at least one world-class aesthete, Disney was already taking the cash-it-in road about the time Walt Disney World first opened. In the interest of avoiding the personal preference issue in defining the point of "going to far," I typically take the hard line of "it's a bad idea to even dance on the edge... if you believe there's anything 'Magical' about your company."

Eisner might very well be an extraordinary businessman, but I have yet to see any evidence that he believes there should be anything Magical about what his company produces; as long as it produces money.

And again, "not that there's anything wrong with that." Just get off of calling it Magic, okay?

Jeff

PS: I got so far afield that I forgot I wanted to address the EE point. To my knowledge (this won't be the first time I've been up front about the 90-98 years being those of which I have the least first-hand Disney knowledge, so I'm open to education on this point), EE was designed as a perq for on-site visitors; one of the Magic Touches that made WDW resorts "worth" three or more times the price of equivalent hotel rooms just across the Interstate. It was an attempt to gain market by offering something the competition could not offer: that's a sound business strategy, based on making your product quantifiably more than it was before, and more than the competition can offer.

Although I've occasionally wallowed in what the loss of EE has meant to me personally, I've tried to base my public arguments on that aspect of EE: staying on-site is now quantifiably less than it was last year at this time, and there is one less Magic Touch making on-site stays more attractive than their off-site counterparts. This is a risky business strategy, based on the hope that the savings of making their product measurably less than it once was will be more than the loss of the business from those folks who actually notice the difference.

Peter Pirate

04-12-2002, 08:00 AM

...it was well worth it IMHO to be at the parks 11/2 hours before they opened to the public.
I've stated this already, but this is one of the problems they had with EE Bob...It WASN"T just a perk for Resort gusts as anyone could & did show up. The solution to preventing this would simply cost more money...
...You can see already by the suddenly halt to any new fastpass installations. Rather than thinking there is evil behing the perceived stoppage of fp additions, it seems to me they have just already hit the attractions that they've intended...Look PW got fp and it is brand new. Dumbo is a slow loader & fp would just make it impossible as a walk on, IMO.

With regard to the notion that fp has increased line waits, I generally disagree...Perhaps to the family or group who just can't figure fp out it could cause longer waits, but then the uninformed are generally spinning their wheels at the parks anyway...But by using fp judiciously it is way easier to see more & especially do the eticket atractions than it was before.

EE still sees like a no brainer to figure out. While certain segments, like brother curling really miss the advantages, the cost/benefit for continuing it probably wasn't even close. I do predict that something will return but it will certainly have a cost attached to it. As for offering fp as a part of Resort packages, I can't see this happening in any big way at all... Safari Steve has already warned us of the intracacies of this system and the problems all of the unfactored 'freebies' would have. I don't believe Disney will cut off its nose to spite its face...
:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

larworth

04-12-2002, 10:31 AM

The premium hasn't gone away, it just exists at different price points. There have been some great deals offered off-site, as well. I assume Disney pricing actions have a ripple effect on much of the market, with hotels adjusting their rates to maintain a certain differential they think is needed to compete.

It would be interesting to see how this differential has changed during this most recent period. Has it remained fairly constant, or has it shrunk?

All Aboard

04-12-2002, 10:53 AM

It would be unfair to use AP or Fl resident rates for comparison, so I'll use those available to everyone:

All Stars $74 standard
Moderates $94 standard
Animal Kingdom Lodge $139 standard
Contemporary $154 garden view
Ft. Wilderness Cabins $159
Beach Club $189 standard
Polynesian $199 garden view

Thanks Mary Waring, by the way.

Since many of you compare the All Stars to a Motel 6 or a Days Inn, by way of comparison those establishments are available for about $29 to $39 right now. I give the All Stars a bigger nod in terms of quality, more like the $49 to $59 resorts in LBV like the Country Inn. That, Courtyard by Marriot, Doubletree Club and Sierra are all offering $59 rates right now.

Stepping up in quality, the Radisson Resort Parkway is going for $69, Quality Suites for $75, Sunspree for $69 and Homewood Suites for $79.

Up another notch, HI Family suites is booking for $104 and Renaissance Orlando $109.

Even higher, the Peabody is going for $179 and MOWS for $159.

Lesley

04-12-2002, 11:19 AM

I don't really get the "anyone could and did show up" as far as EE...and how it would possibly take more money to prevent it. All that needed to be done would be to simply ask for a room card to be shown along with a park ticket. No room card? Sorry, go wait over there for the public opening at 9. Really, is that so difficult?

Even with the parks being empty in Jan. we didn't get the same value from our vacation as we did when there was EE. We used Fast Pass where they had it running (it wasn't running in a lot of places because the standby lines were short....RnR was pretty much a walk on...or as much as it can be with all the preshow stuff). We didn't spend much time waiting in lines, but we generally never did before anyway because we knew how to avoid them (EE and Fastpass) So basically we lost many hours of park time. No ee combined with shorter hours left us still feeling rushed and tempted to try stretching the kids' abilities as far as skipping nap or rest times.

Though we still stay on site, there is less value to doing so now. I used to recommend to everyone, even if they were pinching pennies, to stay on site because it was completely worth it. Now I think I'd reccomend that certain people stay off site. The bus transportation really isn't as good as it used to be and there's no EE. Rent a car and save some on the room. With DVC and AP rates I've still been staying on property....but at rack rates? No way.

I am doubtful that EE will return....even if they see a decline in bookings they'll explain it away as something else. And I'm sure that most travelers to WDW don't really look at what kind of value they're getting. I know folks who are at WDW now....paid for LOS passes and are going to go to Universal and pay for tickets there while they already have tickets for the Disney parks! Heck, there are people out there who buy travel packages! Lots of 'em. I have yet to see a package that is a good value (and believe me, I've looked). So perhaps it was a good financial move to eliminate EE....but I'm not sure that it was a good decision all around. They've ticked off a lot of folks.

Oh, and gcurling, those rates you are quoting are not the current rack rates from what I can tell....they are more equivalent to AP rates. The Poly has been $239 for garden view for quite some time and $189 was the AP rate we were quoted for the BC in Jan. believe the Moderates have been $119 for a while now too. $94 was the rack rate back in 1994 and is still often available through special offers like AP rates.

Scoop, I have no idea where you've seen a $150 rate for the Poly....but that would be extremely low. Even the infamous "postcard" rates were higher. And you can be if I'd been offered the Poly for $150 I would have been there!

barreloflaughs

04-12-2002, 12:10 PM

Lesley wrote:

And I'm sure that most travelers to WDW don't really look at what kind of value they're getting<snip> Heck, there are people out there who buy travel packages! Lots of 'em. I have yet to see a package that is a good value (and believe me, I've looked). So perhaps it was a good financial move to eliminate EE....but I'm not sure that it was a good decision all around. They've ticked off a lot of folks.

I think part of the problem is that the majority of WDW consumers are clueless. They buy LOS passes and go to Universal for a day or two. Many stay on-site, pay rack rate and sleep through EE because either, a) they don't know what it is, or, b) they are on vacation and refuse to wake up that early. They wander aimlessly through the park with no touring schedule and don't have the foggiest idea what Fastpass is (although they do wonder why the people in that other line get to ride before them).

Disney is counting on these clueless visitors to be in the majority for years to come. As long as the educated consumer is in the minority Disney won't really care how ticked off they get. They'll be counting on the clueless masses.

carl
barrel of laughs

All Aboard

04-12-2002, 12:27 PM

Lesley,

I was trying to show the best deals available to the general public for the next few months. The WDW rates are based on mass media ads and are not tied to state residency or passholder type.

Carl,

You are dead on. Disney views us as a minor periphery. A woman that works with my wife asked me for some advice yesterday. Their plan was to drive up to WDW, look for a place to stay and go to a couple of parks. Their son is now five and they thought they'd start going a few times a year. I'm sure they would have purchased single day tickets this time and next. No doubt they would have walked into something like the Radisson and dropped $119 a night rack rate. They are more likely in the majority.

Another expample is how folks here get all excited at the play 4 days promotion. Most have no idea that instead of 4 days for $99, they can get 250 days for $170 with a seasonal pass. Some take advantage of play 4 both times it runs during the year.

Peter Pirate

04-12-2002, 12:29 PM

Lesley, sure your proposal for limiting enterence is simple enough, but the lines will be congested wih people not getting in. There will be grumbling, arguments and bad feelings & the CM's will be put in a circumstance Disney tries very hard to keep their CM's out of. I don't see this as a difficult concept to understand...Conflict, the perception of favoritisim, angry guests, hese things aren't good for business at the happiest place on earth.

I think barreloflaughs is very on target with his consumer analysis. This is the majority & this is who they wish to target. The elimination of EE will obviously not (according o their studies) hurt Resort attendance. This combined with other factors mean adios EE, I'm afraid...
:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

OnWithTheShow

04-12-2002, 12:47 PM

Voice,
There is quite a logistical nightmare involved with installing Fast Pass at an existing attraction. Cables need to be run, ground needs to be dug up and room is needed for the machines themselves. I do not that that it is possible for Dumbo to get FastPass and why try when the attraction never has more than a 20min wait (i mean real time, not wait board time).

Lesley

04-12-2002, 02:17 PM

Me? Pay rack rates? You guys don't know me very well! LOL....never would I pay them if there's a better rate!

My point was that the average clueless guest isn't getting those great rates...only those willing to do lots of calling and searching for a good rate. And without the perk of ee I think less people will be willing to search. I do truly believe that WDW hotels are/will be hurt by the change....but that WDW will choose to blame other things for the losses instead. Maybe they wouldn't have to make such huge discounts if they kept their standards higher.

The whole point of ee was to set the WDW resorts apart in one more way....the cost should be made up in hotel bookings, not breakfast sales. And just because someone didn't attend ee doesn't mean it wasn't an inflential point in getting them to book a WDW resort stay...some folks just like knowing they have the option and that they're treated specially (and many of these folks are members of the clueless masses)

Oh, and as far as grumbling day guests trying to break the rules....hmmm...so Disney panders to groups who aren't giving them large sums of money and have the nerve to complain that they're not getting a perk that resorts guests have paid for (via room rates)? If anyone should be told to "get over it" that's the group to tell.

Ah well, I retire....I don't even know which thread I'm on and I'm haunted by images of clueless masses of moist waconians ....

Panthius

04-13-2002, 08:46 AM

Oh, and as far as grumbling day guests trying to break the rules....hmmm...so Disney panders to groups who aren't giving them large sums of money and have the nerve to complain that they're not getting a perk that resorts guests have paid for (via room rates)? If anyone should be told to "get over it" that's the group to tell.

I definitely agree with this. Also, if they did institute this, eventually, people would begin to get the idea that Disney is no longer letting anybody and everybody with a ticket in early any more. This would result in less people even attempting to get in before the official opening time. I do believe there may be some people who may be upset that they are not going to get something for nothing, but that is not Disney's fault either, and as Lesley said, this group of people should be told to "get over it!".

Panthius :) :cool: :)

Bob O

04-13-2002, 12:57 PM

Peter Pirate How can it cost disney more money to enforce EE???? If the ticket takers do their job like they are paid too do it should be very easy to make sure only hotel guests are allowed in. It would cost no extra money at all if you make sure people are properly trained and they do their job!!!
thedscoop their is no comparsion at all to EE and FP. One was a perk for staying on site and the other is part of a admission that is available to everybody. I dont think the addition of fast pass will make people come to wdw who werent already going to come or now suddenly come to wdw. While EE was a perk that did cause people to change their hotel plans and stay on site!!!
And with the end of EE it will cost wdw at least a thousand dollars of my families money on my next visit and possibley more considering what the prices of the hotels and food is!! And that money will go to Universal if they keep having their front of the line access perk for hotel guests!!!

OnWithTheShow

04-13-2002, 01:03 PM

BobO it is not as easy to enforce as you believe. You can be staying in a Disney Resort and still have a standard park hopper pass.

Panthius

04-13-2002, 01:33 PM

If EE were going to be a resort guest perk, then they should check the room key. If things have not changed too drastically since the last time I visited, they should just have to swipe a room key and it should know by that if the guest is allowed in or out, although once approved for EE, if they have a separate park hopper pass, that would have to be used also.

Pan

Sandy Fisher

04-13-2002, 06:09 PM

When we were at WDW in November, as we were going through the turnstile, the female CM said to me "What moderate are you staying at?" She said her husband had helped build Coronado Springs and they stay there sometimes for short periods. She said she loved CS and always wondered where other people stayed and why.
Now, it didn't dawn on me til later that she had to know it was a moderate (happened to be CBR) by the card key I was using. So if they can tell that, they could surely have a way of knowing whether you were a guest or not. As to the single day passes, yes, a guest could be using them. But then they'd have to have a card/key for their room too right? Simple to show it. Or am I making this more complicated than it needs to be?
We loved the idea of early entry and used it as a planning tool, which is what one of the CMs told me a lot of people did and that's why they didn't think it was used as much as it should be. Told him it was still part of the idea -- the lure of staying on site -- and if it was going to be discontinued something other than Character Caravan should have been offered.
Oh, well, I think I mentioned some of this in a previous post. Sorry for repeating myself.:confused:

marty3d

04-14-2002, 06:03 AM

And there is an easy way to enforce it for the MK (not sure how they did it for the other parks). The last time I stayed on property was 98 and for MK EE they told us we had to take the Bus - which drops you off at the gates. We were told that the Monorails and Ferry didn't drop off passenger till Official Opening - I'm not sure they actually enforced it - but if they did it that way it would be easy - you get off the bus - you get in early.

Another Voice

04-14-2002, 12:55 PM

One comment –

What possible incentive does Disney have to actually enforce the “resort guests only” policy? They can advertise EE as a “perk” for on-site guests (and book a few more hotel nights), but if they let in anyone who shows up that’s just more wallets wandering the parks. Crowding would be the only possible downside, but that doesn’t matter as long as they’re in line to drop twenty bucks at a Character breakfast.

Bob O

04-14-2002, 01:04 PM

Its easy to enforce and a no-brainer. You may everybody who is getting into EE show a valid resort id. Everybody body gets a id so it is no problem and if somebody forgot it, too bad for them. It's easy to enforce the rules as along as the willingness is their to do it!!!

marty3d

04-14-2002, 02:23 PM

I agree with Another Voice, though - what incentive is there to enforce it? First, you annoy another paying guest - something Disney tries to avoid - and you turn away a paying customer.

Maybe the Surprise Mornings were a better idea....

HorizonsFan

04-14-2002, 02:27 PM

First, you annoy another paying guest - something Disney tries to avoid - and you turn away a paying customer.
Not if you only allow resort guest to the front gate early in the first place...

marty3d

04-14-2002, 02:32 PM

[Not if you only allow resort guest to the front gate early in the first place...

As I said - that's easy to enforce at MK - but what about the other parks?

Galahad

04-15-2002, 07:22 AM

We loved the idea of early entry and used it as a planning tool, which is what one of the CMs told me a lot of people did and that's why they didn't think it was used as much as it should be.

As an aside...we've used EE as a planning tool as well. The past couple of years the strategy has been to AVOID the EE park on its EE day. I've talk to a lot of folks who did that. Perhaps EE was also getting in the way of balancing the crowds, etc.

raidermatt

04-15-2002, 01:29 PM

There are plenty of guests who get to the turnstile before they realize they need to have their ticket out, so requiring them to have a room key out as well would slow the lines even more. Maybe if a bar code were branded into guests' foreheads...

Its easy for on-site EE fans to say Disney should tell guests "too bad, so sad" when it doesn't impact them. But just wait until the same principle is applied to them at some other point and listen to them bemoan the demise of Disney service.

But this whole enforcement issues is a moot point. It probably had nothing to do with EE going away.

What DID have everything to do with EE going away is that it cost a large amount of money to operate the parks for those extra hours, and Disney didn't feel it was getting enough revenue from EE to justify it. Pretty simple. It costs $X to run the parks, and the generated revenue is only, say, 50% of that. So its adios EE.

It it turns out to be a bad financial decision, its easy enough to reverse.