Is anyone else hugely entertained by the FP+ tier system test?

[Mad Hattered]

I don't see why park access should be singled out to be "equal" for everyone. If you fly down Orlando in coach, your seat is the same as everyone else's onboard, but every single person paid a different price. Is it "fair" that some people paid more for the exact same seats, while others got discounts, or even free tickets with frequent flier miles?

Very few businesses charge the same thing to every customer anymore. Your frequent buyer status, customer level, etc. all affect everything. I don't see why Disney and resort stays should be any different. I'd love to see onsite guests get more park perks, and Deluxe to get more perks than Mods or Value people.

Here's a good one: the Resort Monorail could be for Resort guests only. Scan your Magic band when you get to the queue. If you're staying at GF, Poly, or CR, or you have an ADR for a restaurant at one of those resorts that day, you get to ride the Resort monorail. If not, you don't. All guests get access to the MK/TTC monorail.

I don't know. I sorta picture Karen Black and that one dude when I think of this scenario.

Perhaps they could hire him at the Poly to keep the regular folk from trying to get to the park they bought a ticket to.

Not to mention....have you ever left MK on an insane night where the Monorail breaks down? Can us regular folk take the boat we were destined to ride while watching the Poly and GFs make a swim for it? Moats are bad.

 

[Planogirl]

I don't see why park access should be singled out to be "equal" for everyone. If you fly down Orlando in coach, your seat is the same as everyone else's onboard, but every single person paid a different price. Is it "fair" that some people paid more for the exact same seats, while others got discounts, or even free tickets with frequent flier miles?

Very few businesses charge the same thing to every customer anymore. Your frequent buyer status, customer level, etc. all affect everything. I don't see why Disney and resort stays should be any different. I'd love to see onsite guests get more park perks, and Deluxe to get more perks than Mods or Value people.

Here's a good one: the Resort Monorail could be for Resort guests only. Scan your Magic band when you get to the queue. If you're staying at GF, Poly, or CR, or you have an ADR for a restaurant at one of those resorts that day, you get to ride the Resort monorail. If not, you don't. All guests get access to the MK/TTC monorail.

How are those who are staying at the BC, the Swan or in Timbuktoo get to somewhere like Kona where no ADR's are often necessary? I doubt that Disney would want keep anyone from having access.

This aside, for those who are so determined that offsite guests spend so little, I still don't see anyone taking free dining into account. If a family stays at the Allstars and gets free dining, don't they spend considerably less than those who stay in deluxe resorts? Or in some cases even less than those who stay offsite? I know people who adore the Swan and Dolphin and who eat at signature restaurants for just about every meal. Should those people really get the cold shoulder from Disney?

 

[DougEMG]

This

From a previous post: Disney occupancy rate for on-site hotels has been dropping the last few years and was around 80 or so percent last year (I believe that was the number I saw posted in another discussion). FP+ is focused specifically on increasing that. Disney gets 99% of dollars spent by on-site guests not close to that for off-site. If FP+ can help get that number into the mid-upper 90's, they will have accomplished their goal.

It's the razor/razor blade or printer/printer ink analogy: Printer companies make 3 times the revenue on printer ink as do shaving companies with razor blades. The added perks, such as more FP+ reservations available for on-site guests, are Disney's "razor".

That is why the increase in standby time (especially for off-site) is a secondary concern for them and why it's a safe bet that on-site will have more FP+opportunities in number and lead time for reserving. The added revenue from the additional on-site guests will more than off-set dollars lost by off-site standing in line.

I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see all room discounts to be replaced by extra FP+ tickets. No cost to give a guest an extra FP+ or two or three.

 

[CookieGVB]

I'm hoping they start selling a FP option like they do at Universal. I'd pay extra to get it. I know I'm going to be booed for that. LOL.
Nancy

They've done it before. Park hoppers are a prime example. For years they had everyone all stoked to "hop"; now they charge extra for the privelege. Paying extra for FastPass can't be too far away.

 

[wisblue]

I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see all room discounts to be replaced by extra FP+ tickets. No cost to give a guest an extra FP+ or two or three.

This would be a coup if they could sell it. Generally they offer specials like free dining and discounted rooms at non peak times. Their success at filling in some of those off times is why (at least in my opinion) people are finding heavier crowds at previously slow times.

Experienced visitors know that wait times are a lot lower at those less busy times, so more FP reservations has a lot less value than at a peak time. But, there would probably be people who would think that a couple extra ride reservations would have value and then find that they have reservations for something with a 5-10 minute wait.

 

[dansamy]

They've done it before. Park hoppers are a prime example. For years they had everyone all stoked to "hop"; now they charge extra for the privelege. Paying extra for FastPass can't be too far away.

Didn't the old hoppers also used to be non-expiring which also costs more now?

 

[robpa]

I don't see why park access should be singled out to be "equal" for everyone. If you fly down Orlando in coach, your seat is the same as everyone else's onboard, but every single person paid a different price. Is it "fair" that some people paid more for the exact same seats, while others got discounts, or even free tickets with frequent flier miles?

Very few businesses charge the same thing to every customer anymore. Your frequent buyer status, customer level, etc. all affect everything. I don't see why Disney and resort stays should be any different. I'd love to see onsite guests get more park perks, and Deluxe to get more perks than Mods or Value people.

Here's a good one: the Resort Monorail could be for Resort guests only. Scan your Magic band when you get to the queue. If you're staying at GF, Poly, or CR, or you have an ADR for a restaurant at one of those resorts that day, you get to ride the Resort monorail. If not, you don't. All guests get access to the MK/TTC monorail.

In your airline analogy you get better service on the flight, more comfortable seat ect ect for the extra money you spent. If people who are staying deluxe or onsite in general want extra then they should be asking for reduced park tickets for a perk. They already gets perks for staying onsite. I know someone posted this earlier but the park is a separate entity from your accommodations and what you can do or can't shouldn't be affected by your choice of where you choose to sleep. If it costs me the same to enter the park I should have the same opportunities to partake of park attractions.

I know Universal gives a park perk to their hotel guests but that is for 3 resorts not 24. Plus Universal doesn't have the same attendance that Disney has.

 

[robpa]

Didn't the old hoppers also used to be non-expiring which also costs more now?

I believe all forms of tickets were non expiring.

 

[clsteve]

How are those who are staying at the BC, the Swan or in Timbuktoo get to somewhere like Kona where no ADR's are often necessary? I doubt that Disney would want keep anyone from having access.

This aside, for those who are so determined that offsite guests spend so little, I still don't see anyone taking free dining into account. If a family stays at the Allstars and gets free dining, don't they spend considerably less than those who stay in deluxe resorts? Or in some cases even less than those who stay offsite? I know people who adore the Swan and Dolphin and who eat at signature restaurants for just about every meal. Should those people really get the cold shoulder from Disney?

Free Dining is a perk to fill rooms- more guests on-site, more revenue. Plus the Free Dining is off-set somewhat by no room discounts if you select it. And it actually proves the point of how important it is to get those guests in All-Stars rooms on-site vs. in another hotel.

If you look at the percentages, let's say dining was 30% of your vacation expenditure. Even if Disney "gives" that to you during slow times, once they get you on that big ol' painted MEARS bus, they're still getting 100% of your lodging, 100% of your ticket expenditure, and 100% of your miscellaneous expenditure. And with, their huge mark-up on alcohol, they're not coming out too far behind on free dining.

Free Dining is like Vegas Casinos heavily discounting rooms during slow times to get guests on the gaming floor.

Additional FP+ for onsite will do the exact thing and could cause the lessening of Free Dining, over time.

The Swan and the Dolphin aren't, technically, considered off-site. Disney knows they will get considerably more revenue from their guests versus ones staying at, say, the Hampton Inn which is why the are afforded most of the same on-site privileges as those staying next door at the Yacht Club.

 

[MrInfinity]

Take a weekend off of the Dis and come back to 5 more pages of rants. I love it.

Oh yeah everyone who stays onsite should get the exact same experience as someone staying offsite. *not*.

Oh yeah when you pay $500/nt to stay at the Poly it's for a nicer room. Hah. Have you seen the Poly rooms? They look like -- oh yeah. A hotel room. With housekeepers who make animals out of your towels. You are not paying for just a room.

If you feel the off-site is enough of a savings that it's worth it to you to do so, given you wont get on rides as fast, that is your CHOICE. If you want the fast passes, then pay the extra $100-$300/nt to stay on property. But certainly don't complain that Disney won't give you something for free that others paid a premium for.

Of course Disney is going to offer perk after perk - some of them being things that ARE REALLY VALUEABLE like FPs - to entice guests to spend big bucks and stay at their resorts.

This is business. Disney's goal is to maximize its own profit while killing off all the competing business. Remember those competing Holiday Inns and HoJos only exist there because they are leeching off the Disney attractions in the first place... now, they will have one more obstacle in their way while they attempt to suck Disney guests offsite by offering cheaper rooms.

I can't help but think all the new changes are AWESOME. It is progress -- picking your FPs from the convenience of your home. No rush for Kiosks. Less abuse by FastPass Runners / Masters. More money spent by most guests. More profit for Disney = more capital investment. There may be some volatility during the rollout but that happens w everything new, leading to much better later.

Oh and someone else said Disney hasn't done anything new lately? Really? Disney just bought Lucas Arts! Huge capital investment. And Marvell comics! And new Fantasyland and new Avatar Land and new Star Wars Land and new Shanghai Disney. Disney is spending money hand over foot on improving and spreading their dominance.

It's just... too funny to read some of these rants.

 

[AmyB2006]

In your airline analogy you get better service on the flight, more comfortable seat ect ect for the extra money you spent. If people who are staying deluxe or onsite in general want extra then they should be asking for reduced park tickets for a perk. They already gets perks for staying onsite. I know someone posted this earlier but the park is a separate entity from your accommodations and what you can do or can't shouldn't be affected by your choice of where you choose to sleep. If it costs me the same to enter the park I should have the same opportunities to partake of park attractions.

I know Universal gives a park perk to their hotel guests but that is for 3 resorts not 24. Plus Universal doesn't have the same attendance that Disney has.

I don't see how that fits. Coach is coach is coach. Everyone is treated the same in coach regardless of how or what you paid. You get a bag of nuts and a soda. LOL

Giving on site resort guests an extra perk is not uncommon with resort theme parks. I don't see why people are all up in arms about this.

 

[MrInfinity]

I'm ok with FP+, but the tiered availability is a big step backwards.

Ok, this seems hypocritical.

A) New FP system, ppl complain that everyone is pre-booking all the Tier-1 rides.

So Disney changes it and tiers them so that cant happen.

B) Now you can only pick one Tier-1 and the rest have to be Tier-2s. People complain about that too! When the goal of the tier system is to make the Tier 1s not get taken so fast.

You can't have it both ways. There are simply that many ppl that want to get on the rides. It's not realistic that you will get to go on them over and over. That may annoy you (it annoys everyone) because we want to ride them... it is the reality of the situation. X-million Visitors, ride handles Y ppl in one day. Do the math. There are not enough runs of each Tier-1 to get each person on it even close to the number of times they'd ideally like to. This has ALWAYS been the case, and is no different now.

 

[AmyB2006]

Ok, this seems hypocritical.

A) New FP system, ppl complain that everyone is pre-booking all the Tier-1 rides.

So Disney changes it and tiers them so that cant happen.

B) Now you can only pick one Tier-1 and the rest have to be Tier-2s. People complain about that too! When the goal of the tier system is to make the Tier 1s not get taken so fast.

You can't have it both ways. There are simply that many ppl that want to get on the rides. It's not realistic that you will get to go on them over and over. That may annoy you (it annoys everyone) because we want to ride them... it is the reality of the situation. X-million Visitors, ride handles Y ppl in one day. Do the math. There are not enough runs of each Tier-1 to get each person on it even close to the number of times they'd ideally like to. This has ALWAYS been the case, and is no different now.

It is ironic isn't it?

 

[robpa]

I don't see how that fits. Coach is coach is coach. Everyone is treated the same in coach regardless of how or what you paid. You get a bag of nuts and a soda. LOL

Giving on site resort guests an extra perk is not uncommon with resort theme parks. I don't see why people are all up in arms about this.

I meant if you fly first class you have a much more comfortable flight than if you fly coach, that is why you are spending the extra money. You definitely get treated differently in first class as opposed to coach.

Guests staying in deluxe are already getting better accommodations(I guess) or why would they spend Disneys rates on a hotel room.They also for the time being get EMH which gives them a park advantage. I would not be happy if I was unable to have the same opportunity to enjoy an amusement park the same as everyone else after having paid the same price.

 

[pouncingpluto]

Ok, this seems hypocritical.

A) New FP system, ppl complain that everyone is pre-booking all the Tier-1 rides.

So Disney changes it and tiers them so that cant happen.

B) Now you can only pick one Tier-1 and the rest have to be Tier-2s. People complain about that too! When the goal of the tier system is to make the Tier 1s not get taken so fast.

You can't have it both ways. There are simply that many ppl that want to get on the rides. It's not realistic that you will get to go on them over and over. That may annoy you (it annoys everyone) because we want to ride them... it is the reality of the situation. X-million Visitors, ride handles Y ppl in one day. Do the math. There are not enough runs of each Tier-1 to get each person on it even close to the number of times they'd ideally like to. This has ALWAYS been the case, and is no different now.

I think it makes perfect sense -- you'd tend to have two different populations complaining about these things, right? People without FP+ would complain about others pre-booking. People with FP+ would complain about decreased utility of FP+.

 

[AmyB2006]

I meant if you fly first class you have a much more comfortable flight than if you fly coach, that is why you are spending the extra money. You definitely get treated differently in first class as opposed to coach.

Guests staying in deluxe are already getting better accommodations(I guess) or why would they spend Disneys rates on a hotel room.They also for the time being get EMH which gives them a park advantage. I would not be happy if I was unable to have the same opportunity to enjoy an amusement park the same as everyone else after having paid the same price.

Oh ok. But that's not what the OP mentioning that was saying, that's why I was confused.

I do agree park admission should afford everyone the same. But for guests staying on site, you don't think they should get any extra perk? EMH have basically dwindled down to nothing and is rumored to disappear altogether once FP+ is fully rolled out.

 

[dmychuds]

I'm kind of having a good time watching grown adults lose grip on reality a little bit, I'll admit it.

It seems funny to see someone who obviously is an obsessive planner get upset because fp+ was obviously not in their plans and now their plans are ever so slightly changed.

 

[robpa]

Oh ok. But that's not what the OP mentioning that was saying, that's why I was confused.

I do agree park admission should afford everyone the same. But for guests staying on site, you don't think they should get any extra perk? EMH have basically dwindled down to nothing and is rumored to disappear altogether once FP+ is fully rolled out.

That is why I said EMH for the time being. Disney's biggest marketing push to staying onsite was being immersed in the magic 24/7 and I guess that doesn't work anymore.

Lets say you go to NYC and choose to stay at the Waldorf. You chose to stay there because of the amenities of the hotel not because of some perk you get of doing something in the city.

If Disney really wants to fill their rooms maybe they should think about dropping the prices to reflect what the rooms are really worth.

 

[robpa]

I'm kind of having a good time watching grown adults lose grip on reality a little bit, I'll admit it.

It seems funny to see someone who obviously is an obsessive planner get upset because fp+ was obviously not in their plans and now their plans are ever so slightly changed.

So you wouldn't mind someone toying with your vacation and you can't do a thing about it? I think that is more of what is bothering people than anything else.

What if you saved for years for this once in a lifetime vacation(which isn't cheap) and now you have very little control over it?

 

[pouncingpluto]

I meant if you fly first class you have a much more comfortable flight than if you fly coach, that is why you are spending the extra money. You definitely get treated differently in first class as opposed to coach.

Guests staying in deluxe are already getting better accommodations(I guess) or why would they spend Disneys rates on a hotel room.They also for the time being get EMH which gives them a park advantage. I would not be happy if I was unable to have the same opportunity to enjoy an amusement park the same as everyone else after having paid the same price.

The thing is, EMH is not fundamentally any different than getting better FP+ access -- it's all in the framing. You pay the same ticket price to get into the park as offsite guests, but you get to enjoy more hours in the park and presumably ride more rides. WDW is paying the cast members and operating the rides from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. (or whatever), but "taking away" park time from offsite guests so that onsite guests get to feel special and ride more rides.

I also think perceptions of what going to WDW means and the implications of staying on-site differ widely. At one end of the spectrum you could see staying onsite it as simply choosing to have a convenient hotel location and a few relatively meaningless "magical" perks and paying a ridiculous premium for it -- but going to WDW means going to Florida and going to the parks, and staying offsite shouldn't make a difference as far as the parks are concerned. Parks and hotels are totally separate things.

On the other end of the spectrum, you can see staying onsite as what it means to go to WDW -- the entirety of Disney property is WDW, and you're staying there because you want to be immersed in it -- the WDW *resort* is your destination. The parks are essentially an amenity of the resort where you are vacationing. Onsite guests are the "real" WDW guests, and offsite guests are visitors with day passes -- like the difference between staying at a beach resort in the Caribbean and visitors who come in on cruise ships and purchase a day pass to use some of the facilities. It doesn't make the offsite visitors any less than or worse than true WDW guests, but it only makes sense that they don't have access to all of the amenities of the resort you're paying an arm and a leg to stay at.