Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Disney Trip Planning Forums > Disney Rumors and News
Find Hotel Specials & DIScounts
 
facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS UpdatesDIS email updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 10-09-2013, 09:53 PM   #106
lockedoutlogic
DIS Veteran
 
lockedoutlogic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Joisey
Posts: 3,317

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silock View Post

Why is that appropriate? Tell me why people staying on site deserve something extra that completely alters the experience.
It actually pretty primal/simple...
Each cent you bring...and most people wing it on vacation... Goes right directly back to them.

Almost every single penny. It's not about the cost of the room - it's everything else.
That's why they would prioritize or incentive the fastpass... If they were to choose too.
__________________
Went there.....
Worked there....(Resort Operations)
Wed there....(EPCOT 2004)
Bought there....(SSR 2006)

Last Trip: Too Long Ago
Next Trip: Can i borrow some money to go?
Gift Shop Quality: When did we get to WalMart?
Food Quality: Only the finest free range roast chicken breast and loch dart salmon in the Kingdom


"May the Space Being bless the Free Market"
lockedoutlogic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 11:22 PM   #107
Planogirl
I feel the nerd in me stirring already
Oh well, let's look on the bright side
If I hadn't been so wiped out I would have kissed my anesthesiologist
 
Planogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Frisco,Texas
Posts: 44,778

Again, it wouldn't make sense to keep offsite visitors stuck in long lines rather than in restaurants and gift shops. I'm sure that Disney makes a lot of money from offsite guests and it would seem odd if they wouldn't want to make as much as possible from everyone who enters the property.

As for incentive, I would argue that offsite probably buy as much "stuff" as people staying onsite. That is hard to quantify though. Also, depending on deals that are available, offsite visitors might just spend even more on meals than onsite visitors. Offsite gets no "free" dining for example.

I can see Disney charging for FP+ eventually for offsite visitors but totally locking them out seems illogical. And us staying offsite this December has no bearing on my opinion.
__________________
PG
Planogirl is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 10-09-2013, 11:24 PM   #108
Planogirl
I feel the nerd in me stirring already
Oh well, let's look on the bright side
If I hadn't been so wiped out I would have kissed my anesthesiologist
 
Planogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Frisco,Texas
Posts: 44,778

By the way, it is interesting that people with reservations that start in December are reporting being unable to make FP+ even though their 60 day window has passed. I wonder what Disney is up to now...
__________________
PG
Planogirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 02:21 AM   #109
Silock
DIS Veteran
 
Silock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 514

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbi View Post
It would be like any other rewards loyalty program. You don't get loyalty points from hotel company A if you're staying at hotel company B.
But they don't deny you the ability to dine in the restaurant of hotel A just because you stayed at hotel B one night.

Quote:
Originally Posted by beer dave View Post
Because a larger chunk of their vacation dollars are going to disney instead of some offsite accomodations. A little thank you for spending even more of your hard earned dollars with the mouse would be quite appropriate.
I don't know if that really works out mathematically. Many guests are able to stay at WDW for longer periods of time because they DON'T stay on property. For instance, my wife and I stay at Bonnet Creek, and we do so for two weeks at a time, once a year. We're in the parks for at least 10 of those days, spending money. So, Disney might make more money upfront with their own hotel room rentals, but less IN the actual park because people don't stay there as long.

I'm just wondering why a guest that stays on site for fewer days than we do, and overall spends less money at Disney, somehow "deserves" more because of their hotel choice.

That's not even the only consideration. I don't know what percentage of guests stay off-site, but it's gotta be fairly high. Many do so because they simply can't afford to stay on property and be there for an appreciable amount of time, given how expensive a Disney trip is. So, now you're talking about denying these people, who are already stretching their budgets to even MAKE it to Disney, easy access to attractions that they pay the same amount to see.

It's not like onsite guests don't already have EMH, but now you want exclusive FP use, too? I think this is short-sighted and greedy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockedoutlogic View Post
It actually pretty primal/simple...
Each cent you bring...and most people wing it on vacation... Goes right directly back to them.

Almost every single penny. It's not about the cost of the room - it's everything else.
That's why they would prioritize or incentive the fastpass... If they were to choose too.
Except 1) Disney doesn't have nearly the capacity to accommodate the influx of guests that would want to book rooms, especially during peak seasons. Then you run into a situation of 2) where people are being turned away, and choose to simply not go to Disney at all because they will have far longer waits than the other guests. Certainly 2 won't apply to everyone, but that's a huge risk. Universal makes it work because they don't have nearly the same traffic that Disney does.
Silock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 06:59 AM   #110
beer dave
There are 10 kinds of people in the world-- those who understand the binary numbering system, and those who do not.
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: sw FL
Posts: 874

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky'sMom View Post
Upgrade from offsite? I have a 5 bedroom pool home reserved. If I have to move onsite for FP+, it will definitely be a downgrade!
Its an upgrade as far as disney is concerned. It doesn't matter where you stay off site-- the money for the room only goes to disney if you stay in one of their resorts.
__________________
Give a man a beer and he wastes a half an hour, but teach a man to brew and he wastes a lifetime.
beer dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 07:06 AM   #111
beer dave
There are 10 kinds of people in the world-- those who understand the binary numbering system, and those who do not.
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: sw FL
Posts: 874

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silock View Post
It's not like onsite guests don't already have EMH, but now you want exclusive FP use, too? I think this is short-sighted and greedy.


EMH has already been greatly reduced, and some feel they are going to go away altogether in the not so distant future.
__________________
Give a man a beer and he wastes a half an hour, but teach a man to brew and he wastes a lifetime.
beer dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 07:12 AM   #112
beer dave
There are 10 kinds of people in the world-- those who understand the binary numbering system, and those who do not.
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: sw FL
Posts: 874

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silock View Post
I don't know if that really works out mathematically. Many guests are able to stay at WDW for longer periods of time because they DON'T stay on property. For instance, my wife and I stay at Bonnet Creek, and we do so for two weeks at a time, once a year. We're in the parks for at least 10 of those days, spending money. So, Disney might make more money upfront with their own hotel room rentals, but less IN the actual park because people don't stay there as long.
Disneys goal is for you to drop your two weeks to the 10 days that you visit the parks with an onsite room, and take all of your vacation dollars.
__________________
Give a man a beer and he wastes a half an hour, but teach a man to brew and he wastes a lifetime.
beer dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 07:47 AM   #113
ArwenMarie
DIS Veteran
 
ArwenMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,810

Quote:
Originally Posted by Planogirl View Post
I can see Disney charging for FP+ eventually for offsite visitors but totally locking them out seems illogical. And us staying offsite this December has no bearing on my opinion.
I hope that FP+ is exactly the same for offsite and onsite too. We were going to start staying offsite because we need more space. I just have a bad feeling that somehow they will make it a better perk for onsite customers.
ArwenMarie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 08:26 AM   #114
tjkraz

DVC Owner SSR
 
tjkraz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 13,109

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockedoutlogic View Post
And you know that 80% for a hotel as a 365 year average is off the charts. The hotel business just isn't and wasnt ever designed on full occupancy... It's not realistic... Travel is too much of a servant to a whole range of issues and conditions that have nothing to do with the magic kingdom.

Come on...you have to be realistic even at Disney. We are at the LOW point at 78%. If the ducktape holds on the economy - there's a boom that will come from some new made up crap... And they're right there back to 90%+
Agree that 78-80% is good for the industry. But you and I both know Disney will step over $.98 to pick up a dollar. The vacant 22% represents an opportunity.

Every percentage points equates to about 30 filled rooms per night. Not only is that $300-400 per night for the room, but it's another 100 or so people staying on-site instead of off. With the higher on-site guest spending numbers.

They can wait for a boom to bring them up to 90%. Or they can look for ways to goose occupancy now to get them into the mid-80s today and mid-90s if/when that boom occurs.

100% occupancy isn't practical but there is room to add revenues now, with only a modest increase in resort-side expenses.

As for whether or not they'll use FP+ to achieve those goals, that remains to be seen. I don't believe they have any plans to monetize the entire FP+ system. All off-site and on-site guests will get their 3 attractions per day.

Offering some added benefit to on-site guests does risk alienating those who are not eligible for such a perk. But my gut tells me Disney would stand to make more than they lose. Universal has been running a two-tiered system for years and they don't seem to be suffering from the blowback.

Some guests will stand by their principles and refuse to patronize the Disney parks, perceiving themselves branded as less important. But I think more people would view it as a reason to pay extra for a Disney hotel rather than staying off-site.
__________________
-- Tim

DVC owner at SSR, BWV and VGC
tjkraz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 08:37 AM   #115
ArwenMarie
DIS Veteran
 
ArwenMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,810

Quote:
Originally Posted by tjkraz View Post
Agree that 78-80% is good for the industry. But you and I both know Disney will step over $.98 to pick up a dollar. The vacant 22% represents an opportunity.

Every percentage points equates to about 30 filled rooms per night. Not only is that $300-400 per night for the room, but it's another 100 or so people staying on-site instead of off. With the higher on-site guest spending numbers.

They can wait for a boom to bring them up to 90%. Or they can look for ways to goose occupancy now to get them into the mid-80s today and mid-90s if/when that boom occurs.

100% occupancy isn't practical but there is room to add revenues now, with only a modest increase in resort-side expenses.

As for whether or not they'll use FP+ to achieve those goals, that remains to be seen. I don't believe they have any plans to monetize the entire FP+ system. All off-site and on-site guests will get their 3 attractions per day.

Offering some added benefit to on-site guests does risk alienating those who are not eligible for such a perk. But my gut tells me Disney would stand to make more than they lose. Universal has been running a two-tiered system for years and they don't seem to be suffering from the blowback.

Some guests will stand by their principles and refuse to patronize the Disney parks, perceiving themselves branded as less important. But I think more people would view it as a reason to pay extra for a Disney hotel rather than staying off-site.
Interesting post. I agree that bumping up occupancy is always a goal. Look at all of the effort Disney puts in to getting people into the "bubble." People who are in the bubble don't just pay for a hotel, but then all of their meals, shopping, etc.

In the future, I think FP will be used in different ways to boost occupancy, but there are lots of ways to do that. Basically, they have taken a system that used to be included with park admission (so "free" in a way) and now they are controlling it, not the park customer.

The one thing that I find interesting is that they have not done one test with anyone other than onsite hotel guests. Could mean nothing. Or something. I guess we will have to wait and see.

Last edited by ArwenMarie; 10-10-2013 at 10:21 AM.
ArwenMarie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 09:59 AM   #116
Planogirl
I feel the nerd in me stirring already
Oh well, let's look on the bright side
If I hadn't been so wiped out I would have kissed my anesthesiologist
 
Planogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Frisco,Texas
Posts: 44,778

I continually see Universal's system brought up as an example but IMO it's a poor one. Universal only has three resorts so I don't see that amount of people having as much of an impact on the ride lines. Also, a fastpass ticket is available for purchase for everyone. No one knows if Disney will do something similar.

I still dispute that Disney necessarily makes that much when it comes to onsite people dining. I just wonder how many people take advantage of free dining. It is true that they are more of a captive audience though.

Some said that Disney would step over $.98 to grab a dollar (love that!) and I agree. I still think that they will want to take as much money from both onsite and offsite groups and treating offsite visitors in such a different way seems counterproductive to that.
__________________
PG
Planogirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 10:55 AM   #117
disneylover1980
Mouseketeer
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 90

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeRmS View Post
This is funny!!

I'm a local AP holder, I "popped" into Disney this weekend - with my $1600 worth of Annual Passes - and spent a whole load of money on food/drinks and souveniers (something along the lines of $400 probably).

Saying that we crowd the parks, use up the FP and don't bring in any money for the "mouse" is far from the truth in my opinion and in fact I'd be almost willing to bet that us local AP holders spend more at Disney in the course of a year than those that visit for a week or 10 days every year.


Amen! This is where I am too. If ANYONE can tell me how I can go to Disney and NOT spend money, please let me know! Even though we are "local" we are STILL at least 2.5 hours away from the parks. It's too far for a day trip so we ALWAYS stay up there. Food? We HAVE to eat and we always eat at the parks. Thinking AP come and go as they please and only use the FP system to keep non locals from using them is rubbish.
disneylover1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 11:48 AM   #118
tjkraz

DVC Owner SSR
 
tjkraz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 13,109

Quote:
Originally Posted by Planogirl View Post
I continually see Universal's system brought up as an example but IMO it's a poor one. Universal only has three resorts so I don't see that amount of people having as much of an impact on the ride lines.
Yes Universal has fewer hotel rooms (although the number is growing--they have 1800 rooms under construction.)

However, Universal Express is quite different than FastPass. First, it's a "front of the line" option where participants walk right past the public to ride whenever they wish. There are no scheduled return times. Also there are no limits on its use. Disney is looking at 3 FP+ options per day. Universal Express could be used 30 times in a day by guests with park hopping tickets.

Additionally, Universal has fewer parks and fewer attractions which accept the Express Pass.

There may be fewer FOTL participants at Universal (hotel guests + those who pay for it) but there are also fewer attractions which offer that service and no limits on the number of times those people can use the perk.

You're right that there's no way to truly compare both since they are quite different. However, I suspect they have a similar psychological impact on guests.

The question posed was whether off-site guests would shun the Disney parks because they receive a lesser FP+ option. My response to that is yes, some probably will. However a similar two-tiered system (the Haves and the Have-nots) has existed at USF for many years and they don't seem to be harmed by the business lost.

Quote:
Also, a fastpass ticket is available for purchase for everyone. No one knows if Disney will do something similar.
Disney has repeatedly said that FP+ would be available to everyone. That includes a statement from Bob Iger to congressman Ed Markey.

What we don't know is if everyone will get identical FP+ benefits. Disney COULD give more rides to its hotel guests. They COULD sell additional FP+ ride times at a price. Many possibilities.

At the end of the day, if Disney does decide to directly monetize FP+, I think it stands to gain a lot more $$$ than it would lose from the disgruntled few.
__________________
-- Tim

DVC owner at SSR, BWV and VGC
tjkraz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 11:59 AM   #119
Robbi
DIS Veteran
 
Robbi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,694

Quote:
Originally Posted by tjkraz View Post
Yes Universal has fewer hotel rooms (although the number is growing--they have 1800 rooms under construction.)

However, Universal Express is quite different than FastPass. First, it's a "front of the line" option where participants walk right past the public to ride whenever they wish.
There are no scheduled return times. Also there are no limits on its use. Disney is looking at 3 FP+ options per day. Universal Express could be used 30 times in a day by guests with park hopping tickets.

Additionally, Universal has fewer parks and fewer attractions which accept the Express Pass.

There may be fewer FOTL participants at Universal (hotel guests + those who pay for it) but there are also fewer attractions which offer that service and no limits on the number of times those people can use the perk.

You're right that there's no way to truly compare both since they are quite different. However, I suspect they have a similar psychological impact on guests.

The question posed was whether off-site guests would shun the Disney parks because they receive a lesser FP+ option. My response to that is yes, some probably will. However a similar two-tiered system (the Haves and the Have-nots) has existed at USF for many years and they don't seem to be harmed by the business lost.



Disney has repeatedly said that FP+ would be available to everyone. That includes a statement from Bob Iger to congressman Ed Markey.

What we don't know is if everyone will get identical FP+ benefits. Disney COULD give more rides to its hotel guests. They COULD sell additional FP+ ride times at a price. Many possibilities.

At the end of the day, if Disney does decide to directly monetize FP+, I think it stands to gain a lot more $$$ than it would lose from the disgruntled few.
FOTL guests get in the express line just as Disney guests get in the FP line. Both walk past the public. FOTL is basically an unlimited fast pass IF you stay onsite, however, you don't cut the line in front of other Express ticket holders.
Robbi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 12:03 PM   #120
tjkraz

DVC Owner SSR
 
tjkraz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 13,109

Just to respond to a few older posts...

Quote:
Originally Posted by disneylover1980 View Post
as a local, we were just there this past weekend and I have to say that I was appalled at the way the new magic bands were being treated. By the time DHS was even OPENED the FIRST thing we did was go to Pixar to get FP for the Toy tory Mania ride....and the times were ALREADY between 3:30 and 4:30...at 9am! I planned on writing a letter to corporate but I feel it will fall on deaf ears. I was talking to a guy in the line to get in, and he was also an annual pass holder that was a local and he said this was the last time he was going...his passes expire at the end of the month and he was OVER it too. So sad!
One of the problems with this testing phase is that they are allowing resort guests to double-dip FastPasses by both reserving in advance AND using KTTW cards or some other physical medium to obtain paper FP tickets.

Passholders WILL have access to the FP+ system. At one point there was a mention of some limit. 20 days per quarter (3 mos) rings a bell. But I haven't heard anything about that recently.

Once the FP+ system is in place, getting day-of FastPasses will be relatively easy. Think about how the system has changed. FP+ will:

1) Add dozens of new attractions and experiences to the FP system.
2) Places limits on the daily FP allocation for each guest.

So they're adding new FP options all over the place while reducing the number that most guests can actually use.

Toy Story Mania and maybe Soarin are the sorts of attractions that may be tough to obtain same-day due to their popularity. But for all other attractions, I think you'll be able to pop onto your laptop or smartphone the night before, while riding to the parks, or even while in the park, and still get a FP+ reservation time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crystal824 View Post
This is my thoughts on this too...which is terrible for AP holders. Perhaps the system will allow AP holders to book FP+ in advance too once rolled out fully, but who knows. I'm not counting on it.
See above. Yes, Passholders will have access.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottmel View Post
I think it is bad for off site visitors unless I am not understanding something. My understanding is the FP plus is tied to a RESORT reservation. Someone staying off site is not a resort guest therefore can't access fast pass plus 60/90 days out..Is this NOT true? I assumed they could only show up at the park the day of their visit and try to schedule the rides then...
Again, Disney has said repeatedly that all guests will have access to the 60 day advance reservations. Only requirement is that you have valid theme park tickets (including AP) linked to your My Disney Experience account.

A Disney resort reservation is not required.
__________________
-- Tim

DVC owner at SSR, BWV and VGC
tjkraz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
GET OUR DIS UPDATES DELIVERED BY EMAIL



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright © 1997-2014, Werner Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

You Rated this Thread: