FP+... who hates it

Status
Not open for further replies.
Do people feel waiting in the kiosk lines takes a lot of time to pick additional FP+? I really never waited a minute or more in any parks.

Very empty kiosk lines the first week of March, so no-at least that week.
 
Well, according to what I've read, Disney has removed some kiosks. In MK for example there are 3 kiosks areas available for making 4th FP+ selections. so the lines a considerably longer.

We saw a lot of CM's with ipads-hopefully they can "show up" when needed.

The kiosk near Adventure land seemed the most compact area, I think only 3 kiosks and not good flow.
 
Do people feel waiting in the kiosk lines takes a lot of time to pick additional FP+? I really never waited a minute or more in any parks.
It varied for us.

We visited last week and found the Stitch kiosk to be reasonably quiet with usually only 2 or 3 people ahead of us. The location by the hallway between Adventureland and Frontierland was quite a bit busier. We also visited one of the Epcot kiosks a few times and usually had 3 or 4 people ahead of us. I never did find the other kiosks. :)
 
So if I believe all this why do I still like the system? Because I rarely pulled more than 3 FPs before, so there's very little lost to me in that respect, however the preplanning is a huge benefit to me, so my experience is net positive. I am enjoying other aspects of the resort besides the four major parks, and no one attraction is make-or-break for our family. I plan out park days because I enjoy doing it, not because it's necessary for us to have a good vacation. Others will obviously have different experiences, but I can't be the only one who enjoys WDW vacations in this way.

Yep, same. :thumbsup2

But keep in mind this about hating FP+, so apologies.
 


I liked this post Wisblue because I agree that Disney has motivation to want to see FP more evenly distributed than the extreme case. But I think you should be careful about the presentation of your argument. There was nothing at all about the old system that prevented a FP- holder from passing on one they weren't going to use to someone else in the park. And there is nothing at all (conceptually) about the new system that prevents a FP+ holder from skipping a FP+ they have reserved without modifying or canceling it so that someone else can have a shot at it. The cheap hit that you took on MadHattered weakens your otherwise strong point, IMO. :-)

I agree it was a cheap hit. We desperately tried to change or cancel our FP+s from our room. We were all sick with head colds and needed to move at a slower pace. So DS17 tried from his phone and a laptop to first change our FPs to something later...no luck, at least not anything we were interested in. And then he tried to just cancel, once again with the courtesy of others in mind...nope system would not let him, so those 2 set of FP+s for 4 people went unused that day.

There were certainly people who did the same thing at WDW, where it would cost people. The sport of gathering as many fp's as one possibly could in a day needed to be stopped.

Why? There are people who are still strategizing and making sport on the new system...it throwaway rooms, multiple bands etc. even getting on at midnight and booking your last days first to get key FP+s have turned into a sport. And there is no even distribution, offsite is behind, people who buy tickets are behind. The only people it is "fair" to are those onsite who can book at midnight and even then it is not fair bc if you started your trip the day before I did you get a jump on some of my park days. The system was first come first serve for ALL guests, not it is first come first serve for some of the guests.

Do people feel waiting in the kiosk lines takes a lot of time to pick additional FP+? I really never waited a minute or more in any parks.

This was Christmas week...the line at Frontierland was awful, we did much better by Jungle Cruise but line was still long. The lines at DHS were the worst at TSMM and there were CMs with Ipads in front of the hat. The shortest line was at AK across from Yak and Yet, once again CMs with Ipads.
 
Very empty kiosk lines the first week of March, so no-at least that week.

We're going again this summer. Do you think the kiosks will be useful then? I don't want to stand in line for 15 minutes (or more) just to get a FP for something that has a 15 minute line.
 
We're going again this summer. Do you think the kiosks will be useful then? I don't want to stand in line for 15 minutes (or more) just to get a FP for something that has a 15 minute line.

Summer, hmm it's been a while but I think June to early August is pretty busy, much busier than the first week of March, later August would be best.

I have to think they are "monitoring" this and planning accordingly. Seems odd they would purposely increase the kiosk lines just to frustrate and have folks give up, but the theory is out there.

We still have been enough that we would reserve every other night at MK (esp 7DMT) and DHS. Then adjust later/closer. We have no interest in going after the 4th-would far prefer to RD without FP+ at AK and EPCOT (knocked out Soarin and TT by 9:30 without FP+) and then have some prime slots for that evening.

EX Mon AM-AK no FP+ (can do it all by 1PMish)

Mon Eve-FP+ 7DMT/Space/BTMRR/Parade/CTM/Wishes.

Tues AM-EPCOT (Soarin and TT without FP+, then do the rest SB easily).

Tues EVE- TSM/TOT/ST/Fantasmic

Wed AM-spontaneous

Wed EVE FP+ Splash/PPan/7DMT

Thurs AM-spontaneous

Thurs EVE- FP+RNR/TOT/TGMR

ETC.

If you have an ADR at EPCOT one evening-then maybe reserve TT/SE/MS/ADR/Illuminations and RD MK without FP+.

Keep in mind most of our AM's would be golfing, fishing, Clearwater Beach and even US/IOA, maybe a RD here and there-all spontaneous choices depending on weather, rest, mood etc.
 


However to suggest that said group of concerned fans is representative of the population as a whole is absurd.

TripAdvisor is yet again an absolute textbook case of self-selection and should not be viewed as representative.

You are taking the notion of self-selection too far, especially as it relates to the "population as a whole". The population as a whole is irrelevant to this discussion. The views and opinion of people who live in Inner Mongolia or Turkmenistan don't matter here. The "population" that matters is the population of people who travel. And more specifically, people who travel within the U.S. And to be more precise, people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks. And to be even more precise than that, people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks and who go to WDW. That sub-group is itself, self-selected. So whether or not Tripadvisor captures a cross-slice of the "overall population" simply doesn't matter. Does Tripadvisor capture a cross-slice of people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks and who go to WDW? And the answer is...of course it does.
 
It's interesting, but Themepark Insiders vote of the week that started today is on this subject. It is still a biased poll in that it's theme park lovers and the it may be too early for definitive results. But the initial results are interesting.

upload_2015-3-27_12-52-33.png (Screen shot as of 12:45 p.m. 3/27)

Based on early results, if you ignore the people who didn't visit 62% liked FP+, 33% didn't like FP+ and 5% didn't use FP+. Based on those results, like it or not, FP+ has a 95% adoption rate. I don't think legacy FP was ever that high. And by a substantial percentage, most people liked FP+. It will be interesting to see how the poll progresses. Of course after mentioning it here, everyone will run over skew the results.
 
You are taking the notion of self-selection too far, especially as it relates to the "population as a whole". The population as a whole is irrelevant to this discussion. The views and opinion of people who live in Inner Mongolia or Turkmenistan don't matter here. The "population" that matters is the population of people who travel. And more specifically, people who travel within the U.S. And to be more precise, people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks. And to be even more precise than that, people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks and who go to WDW. That sub-group is itself, self-selected. So whether or not Tripadvisor captures a cross-slice of the "overall population" simply doesn't matter. Does Tripadvisor capture a cross-slice of people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks and who go to WDW? And the answer is...of course it does.

Jimmy, there is a logical fallacy in your argument.

I will 100% agree with the bolded statement.

The bone of contention here is whether the opinions and experiences of that slice that is captured in TripAdvisor represents the opinions and experiences of the entire population of people who go to WDW -- this is what NavyDad is referring to when he cites the "population as a whole", he is not referring to the global population. You accurately identify the cross-slice as a sample of the larger population [that goes to WDW]. However, in order to guarantee the ability to draw valid conclusions about the general population [that goes to WDW] from the expressed opinions of a sample, the sample must be representative of the entire population [that goes to WDW]. Otherwise the results are potentially biased ... hence the term sampling bias.

Note that I do not say the conclusions drawn from a biased sample are automatically invalid. What is incorrect is to justify those conclusions by using the biased sample. ;-)
 
You are taking the notion of self-selection too far, especially as it relates to the "population as a whole". The population as a whole is irrelevant to this discussion. The views and opinion of people who live in Inner Mongolia or Turkmenistan don't matter here. The "population" that matters is the population of people who travel. And more specifically, people who travel within the U.S. And to be more precise, people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks. And to be even more precise than that, people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks and who go to WDW. That sub-group is itself, self-selected. So whether or not Tripadvisor captures a cross-slice of the "overall population" simply doesn't matter. Does Tripadvisor capture a cross-slice of people who travel within the U.S. who go to theme parks and who go to WDW? And the answer is...of course it does.

The population I was talking about is the WDW guest population.

And again to suggest that a sub-group that chooses to go to TripAdvisor and chooses to write a review is representative of the entire WDW guest population is still completely absurd...
 
The population I was talking about is the WDW guest population.

And again to suggest that a sub-group that chooses to go to TripAdvisor and chooses to write a review is representative of the entire WDW guest population is still completely absurd...
Not when there are 315 million individual users per month. It is absolutely representative of enough of the WDW guest population to really matter. And it is more representative of the WDW guest population than the people chosen to take in-park surveys given by CMs with i-Pads. The CMs can easily skew results by simply approaching people who are smiling and laughing. I'll bet that there aren't too many CMs with survey i-Pads hanging around the Guest Services line approaching people who are raising their voices in complaint.
 
Not when there are 315 million individual users per month. It is absolutely representative of enough of the WDW guest population to really matter. And it is more representative of the WDW guest population than the people chosen to take in-park surveys given by CMs with i-Pads. The CMs can easily skew results by simply approaching people who are smiling and laughing. I'll bet that there aren't too many CMs with survey i-Pads hanging around the Guest Services line approaching people who are raising their voices in complaint.

Hi Jimmy

I'm going to disagree with you here. I've said this once before but I was approached twice to take a survey. I know for sure that one of the times I would've looked absolutely miserable because I felt absolutely miserable. It was raining, I was soaked and (unknowingly) had a cold. I was in an awful mood, so I do not buy the notion that 'iPad wielding CMs' only approach shiny, happy people to take their surveys.
 
However, in order to guarantee the ability to draw valid conclusions about the general population [that goes to WDW] from the expressed opinions of a sample, the sample must be representative of the entire population [that goes to WDW]. Otherwise the results are potentially biased ... hence the term sampling bias.
I understand this point very well. But when taken to its logical conclusion, then there can never be a sample of people who voice their opinions that accurately captures the feelings of the entire population. Not Disney's surveys or anything else. Any survey that allows you to say "no" to the person with the i-Pad, or delete the email asking you to take the survey is going to suffer from self-selection. The only way that views can truly represent the total population is to force every single person to answer a questionnaire. Or, to have a subgroup constructed that is a perfect microcosm of the entire population. Neither method is being done by anyone. So once we reach the conclusion that there can never be a survey or comments board that accurately reflects the entire WDW population, we have to move to the next best thing. Which survey/comments source best captures the overall feeling of the guests. The law of large numbers says it is the survey that is the least biased and has the most users/posters. That would be something like Tripadvisor. It is surely the largest sample size. And it isn't biased (beyond the point where only a subset of people choose to post comments and reviews). People there are not responding to leading questions, open questions, or anything at all. People are free to post whatever they want, on whatever topic they want. That is about as unbiased as it gets.
 
Hi Jimmy

I'm going to disagree with you here. I've said this once before but I was approached twice to take a survey. I know for sure that one of the times I would've looked absolutely miserable because I felt absolutely miserable. It was raining, I was soaked and (unknowingly) had a cold. I was in an awful mood, so I do not buy the notion that 'iPad wielding CMs' only approach shiny, happy people to take their surveys.
I didn't say that they do do that. I said that they could do that. In other words, if results are not trending the way they would like, they could figure out ways to bend the data. I'm not suggesting that this was the case with you, but how do you know that when you were approached, the CM hadn't just gotten 25 consecutive "rainbow and unicorn" families to respond and they were actually looking at you as someone who might in fact have provided a different point of view? And in the end, if you were tired and miserable, and had nasty things to say to them, you might have simply brushed them aside and not given your opinion at all. Not responding does as much damage to the results as responding, in many instances. Bottom line...if people think that Disney's i-Pad surveys do a better job of capturing the overall gestalt of the parks than Tripadvisor, I have some swamp land I'd like to sell them.
 
I didn't say that they do do that. I said that they could do that. In other words, if results are not trending the way they would like, they could figure out ways to bend the data. I'm not suggesting that this was the case with you, but how do you know that when you were approached, the CM hadn't just gotten 25 consecutive "rainbow and unicorn" families to respond and they were actually looking at you as someone who might in fact have provided a different point of view? And in the end, if you were tired and miserable, and had nasty things to say to them, you might have simply brushed them aside and not given your opinion at all. Not responding does as much damage to the results as responding, in many instances. Bottom line...if people think that Disney's i-Pad surveys do a better job of capturing the overall gestalt of the parks than Tripadvisor, I have some swamp land I'd like to sell them.

I'm not going to defend my comment because I shoudn't have to. I'm not the one attempting to accuse Disney of survey manipulation.

Also, it's not in a company's best interest to skew results.

Sorry, but that's all I have to say.
 
I understand this point very well. But when taken to its logical conclusion, then there can never be a sample of people who voice their opinions that accurately captures the feelings of the entire population. Not Disney's surveys or anything else. Any survey that allows you to say "no" to the person with the i-Pad, or delete the email asking you to take the survey is going to suffer from self-selection. The only way that views can truly represent the total population is to force every single person to answer a questionnaire. Or, to have a subgroup constructed that is a perfect microcosm of the entire population. Neither method is being done by anyone. So once we reach the conclusion that there can never be a survey or comments board that accurately reflects the entire WDW population, we have to move to the next best thing. Which survey/comments source best captures the overall feeling of the guests. The law of large numbers says it is the survey that is the least biased and has the most users/posters. That would be something like Tripadvisor. It is surely the largest sample size. And it isn't biased (beyond the point where only a subset of people choose to post comments and reviews). People there are not responding to leading questions, open questions, or anything at all. People are free to post whatever they want, on whatever topic they want. That is about as unbiased as it gets.

I respect your many years of accumulated park wisdom, and I read your advice about how you and others you know experience the parks (and many other topics) with great interest. On this however, I feel we will have to agree to disagree.
 
Not when there are 315 million individual users per month. It is absolutely representative of enough of the WDW guest population to really matter. And it is more representative of the WDW guest population than the people chosen to take in-park surveys given by CMs with i-Pads. The CMs can easily skew results by simply approaching people who are smiling and laughing. I'll bet that there aren't too many CMs with survey i-Pads hanging around the Guest Services line approaching people who are raising their voices in complaint.

1. You keep throwing 315 million out there but change the group it represents. The first thing you quoted showed 315 million VISITORS to the site. With the number of people who lurk on sites like those "visitors" and "active users who submit reviews" are going to be two completely different groups. How many of those people actually submit reviews? How many are submitting reviews for WDW related locations?

2. Sample size is an important factor. Polling 3 people vice 30, 300 or 30 mil is obviously not as acurate.

3. NO matter the sample size, the results can be skewed greatly depending on sampling bias. Self selection is one of the strongest forms of bias. There is no polling firm or market research team that would ever use a self-selecting poll where you have to choose to make the effort to submit your opinion.

4. What we are talking about is a representative sample. Having a large sample size does not make a sample represenative. It just smooths out the effects of random returns. If you have 80% of a population polled but they self selected the results would not be as acurate as 5% that were selected properly.
 
I look at Tripadvisor a lot when I'm going to be staying at a hotel I've never been to before or eat at a place I've never eaten at before. I also look at the reviews on Amazon and Walmart and a bunch of other sites when I'm researching a purchase.

I've never thought about whether or not those reviews were representative of the entire human race or just some subset thereof because that wouldn't really matter to me. What does matter to me are the reported opinions and experiences of people who have gone to, stayed at, eaten at, or bought what I'm considering. I read both the positive and the negative and evaluate both before making my decision.

I suspect a lot of other people use that information in much the same way.
 
I look at Tripadvisor a lot when I'm going to be staying at a hotel I've never been to before or eat at a place I've never eaten at before. I also look at the reviews on Amazon and Walmart and a bunch of other sites when I'm researching a purchase.

I've never thought about whether or not those reviews were representative of the entire human race or just some subset thereof because that wouldn't really matter to me. What does matter to me are the reported opinions and experiences of people who have gone to, stayed at, eaten at, or bought what I'm considering. I read both the positive and the negative and evaluate both before making my decision.

I suspect a lot of other people use that information in much the same way.

May I suggest the possibility that you do actually care about the composition of the sample? You say that you read and evaluate both the positive and negative ... let us say that you have kids (no idea IRL), would it not affect your weighting of the negative reviews if a large percentage of them started of "Perhaps I would have felt differently if I had kids, but ... "?

For the individual, these sites are useful even if they do not completely represent the population because we are able to digest the individual reviews to identify those whose circumstances are similar to ours, or who have focused more on features that we particularly care about. Even if most reviewers don't have kids that would be OK, because you'll be able to focus on the few reviews that you identify as having high value to you.

A business though is trying to look from the standpoint of everyone in their market, instead of picking out the examples that are applicable to them. Here, not being able to find representative opinions from every pertinent demographic is a big problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top