All FP machines to be removed from Animal Kingdom by next week and....

[FireDancer]

No one should try to infer implementation from a patent filing ever. It gets done in the tech world all the time and the inference is right pretty much, um, never. This is especially true if software is in any way a part of the patent as it is with the entire NextGen project.

It's adorable and all but entirely useless.

 

[Laketravis]

No one should try to infer implementation from a patent filing ever.

Oh, okay.

I know it's a lot to read, but I guess they won't be doing this:

For instance, a guest comprised of three adult female friends attending a experience area 22 on one day and a spa resort 30 on a second day, will require application of one set of business rules 112 to determine a first strategy in accordance with 220. However, a guest comprised of a family with two young children accompanied by grandparents planning to visit the same experience area 22 over two days may require application of some of the same business rules 112 as the first example, but also some additional business rules 112, generating a very different guest strategy in accordance with 220.


Or this:

Identifying the guest may include validating that the guest has not exceeded a threshold number of bookings or pending appointments that have not been paid for.


Or this:

Such ticket business rules 112 may also include differing rules that apply based on whether the guest will be staying on site at a hotel located at one of the experience areas 22, or will be driving each day to the experience areas 22.

Or this:

As an example, determining the guest strategy in accordance with 22 may include application of business rules 112 such as guests that pay with a co-branded credit card (like Disney Visa?) are allowed earlier access to certain experience areas 22 and/or to certain experiences 18 than other guests may be allowed.

Or even this:

By way of example, determining the guest strategy at 220 for the particular guest may take into account the typical bottlenecks across the experience areas 22, such as at the normal opening hours when guests crowd the entrances to try and rush to popular experiences 18 and set parameters that ensure that the guest's visit schedule does not cause the guest to enter a particular experience area 22 until after the morning crowd has typically subsided.

Those are just of few of the explicit claims that apparently Disney has no intention of implementing.

 

[pilferk]

Because I have never booked a WDW trip through a travel agent, I don't know how active those agents will be in actually making FP+ reservations for their clients. It is one thing to make airline and room reservations for their clients and to provide information about attractions and reminders about timelines for making dining and FP+ reservations. But, it's something else to actually create MDE accounts and log on to them on their client's behalf to make those reservations.

I can tell you that many travel agencies, especially those who specialize in Disney trips, make ADRs for their clients, now. That's not to say they will certainly make FP+ for them, too...but it's not much of a leap.

 

[Jennasis]

I know someone who booked through a travel agent and was told the agent would make their FP+ reservations.

 

[doconeill]

Patents protect the invention. They do not require implementation of all of it - or even any of it.

 

[doconeill]

I know someone who booked through a travel agent and was told the agent would make their FP+ reservations.

There is language in the T&C about travel agents now, and how they are supposed to set up separate accounts for their bookings and not use their own or something like that.

But they are NOT required to do it on behalf of their customers. The guests can do it independently IF they can get their Disney reservation number.

Some TAs seem to protect that information, however, I presume because the guest could change things without their knowing.

 

[FireDancer]

Everything put into a patent filing is there for one of two reasons. Defending the patent against lawsuit and suing someone who you believe infringes on it. Because of that the patents are as broad as possible. Trying to infer how a patent will be implemented from the filing is a wast of time and energy but go ahead.

It is much more a legal document then a technological document even when technology is being patented.

 

[lugnut33]

Everything put into a patent filing is there for one of two reasons. Defending the patent against lawsuit and suing someone who you believe infringes on it. Because of that the patents are as broad as possible. Trying to infer how a patent will be implemented from the filing is a wast of time and energy but go ahead.

It is much more a legal document then a technological document even when technology is being patented.

Why do I always read your posts in a Tina Turner voice?

 

[Laketravis]

Trying to infer how a patent will be implemented from the filing is a waste of time and energy.

Okay, I'll disregard that information and go by what the bus driver told me.



T minus 22 hours, 15 minutes and counting..............

 

[rebbyparker]

Okay, I'll disregard that information and go by what the bus driver told me.



T minus 22 hours, 15 minutes and counting..............

It needs to be tomorrow already!

 

[lugnut33]

How desperate is Disney to add FP capacity? Look at this:

The Comedy Warehouse Holiday Special at Disney's Hollywood Studios will be available for FastPass+ reservations this year.

All showtimes will be included in FastPass+ - 12:45pm, 1:45pm, 3pm, 5pm, 6pm, 7pm in the Premier Theater from December 21 2013 to January 5 2014. A standby line will be available for non-FastPass+ users.

The Comedy Warehouse is in tier 2 of the FastPass+ groupings

That came from wdwmagic website

 

[clsteve]

No one should try to infer implementation from a patent filing ever. It gets done in the tech world all the time and the inference is right pretty much, um, never. This is especially true if software is in any way a part of the patent as it is with the entire NextGen project.

It's adorable and all but entirely useless.

Inferring a patent for specific functionality is zero sum, agreed. However, using it to discern what a company wants to do is valuable: such as, have a clear differentiation between on-site/offsite, length of stay, and ticket types. It also points out that some of the major reasons for doing it: such as extending a guests time-in-Park. And much of what we already have seen is specifically outlined in the document.

Viewing the methods and processes they are protecting is anything but adorable and useless.

 

[doconeill]

How desperate is Disney to add FP capacity? Look at this:



That came from wdwmagic website

How much do you want to bet that the shows during Star Wars Weekends will be FP+ - or even some of the meet and greets?

 

[wisblue]

In the patent thread, I thought the parts about different rules depending on resort and offsite/onsite were very interesting. I think we are getting clues about these differences as they roll it out....So to see it in the patent as well helps put Disney's current actions into the bigger picture and goals.

Again, the patent application covers capabilities of the system. Some of the testing going on now helps to see how those capabilities are preforming.

The results of those tests, including how guest experience is affected, will help Disney to determine what features to put in place. And, just because they put a feature into place at one time doesn't mean they can't change it later.

Didn't everyone always anticipate that a distinction between onsite and offsite guests was possible, if not likely? So, why should we be surprised that the patent application includes the possibility of this distinction?

Same thing with different treatment for things like Disney Visa cardholders. Those cardholders have always had access to various discounts and special deals (like the free photo). How surprising is it that Disney would at least consider giving those cardholders a perk relating to more or earlier access to FP+ reservations. That is exactly like fan clubs of a performer getting first crack at a block of concert tickets.

 

[pilferk]

There is language in the T&C about travel agents now, and how they are supposed to set up separate accounts for their bookings and not use their own or something like that.

But they are NOT required to do it on behalf of their customers. The guests can do it independently IF they can get their Disney reservation number.

Some TAs seem to protect that information, however, I presume because the guest could change things without their knowing.

If a customer has the reservation number, they can transfer the reservation, too...to another agency (including Disney Travel)...thereby cutting the original booking agents commission...OR make changes themselves.

Most agents will release the number, if you push, though. But they try to do as much as possible to prevent their need to. That's another reason I suspect you'll have TA's making FP+.

To be clear: I'm not entering the "debate" on the effect of that. Just pointing out that it's possible, and maybe even likely.

 

[doconeill]

Didn't everyone always anticipate that a distinction between onsite and offsite guests was possible, if not likely? So, why should we be surprised that the patent application includes the possibility of this distinction?

I believe there was an even earlier patent filing (which this one could have updated or superceded) that spoke of the possibility of tiering the resorts and on/offsite. We had many discussions on it. It also had things like using your smartphone as the Fastpass redemption device, kiosks at the resorts or via the in-room TV system, etc.

They've been thinking about it for a long time...but that still doesn't mean that they will implement it. A patent is not an implementation, or even a plan for implementation. It's to protect the creator of the invention itself so that someone else can't just copy it and sell it.

 

[lugnut33]

How much do you want to bet that the shows during Star Wars Weekends will be FP+ - or even some of the meet and greets?

You will be 100% correct.

 

[Laketravis]

Again, the patent application covers capabilities of the system. Some of the testing going on now helps to see how those capabilities are preforming.

The results of those tests, including how guest experience is affected, will help Disney to determine what features to put in place. And, just because they put a feature into place at one time doesn't mean they can't change it later.

Didn't everyone always anticipate that a distinction between onsite and offsite guests was possible, if not likely? So, why should we be surprised that the patent application includes the possibility of this distinction?

Same thing with different treatment for things like Disney Visa cardholders. Those cardholders have always had access to various discounts and special deals (like the free photo). How surprising is it that Disney would at least consider giving those cardholders a perk relating to more or earlier access to FP+ reservations. That is exactly like fan clubs of a performer getting first crack at a block of concert tickets.

What other features would you not be surprised to see them put into place?

Dynamic FP+ volume? Meaning, you get less FP's on busy days and more on not so busy days?

Dynamic Park Hopping? Meaning, you are allowed to make FP+ selections at a second particular park because that particular park is less than ideally loaded that day?

I wouldn't use the word "surprised" when describing my reaction to any of the possibilities that make it to actual implementation and multiple iterations of revision, but I am "curious" which ones will prove meaningful and of value to everyone.

For instance, I don't see myself as appreciating that any FP+ reservations suggested by the app also take into account the most efficient way to get from attraction A to B to C within the park, I pretty much know my way around, but understand that a lot of people are literally lost.

Sure is interesting to see what elements survive.

 

[pilferk]

THIS, is very very interesting.

If true, this could dramatically change the outlook on FP+.

As right now many people are counting on being able to go on at day 60 and scoop up what they want, if other people have had a 10 day head start, hrm ....

I mean, I would think you would still be able to get your FPs but perhaps not the ones you want at the times you want for the first half of your trip, depending on length. If you trip is short, well, you might actually be out of luck in that case.

I think what the poster you're responding to is describing what everyone has seen.

In other words, it's like the ADR system (180+10)...except instead of giving you a set duration, in most cases the +x is the duration of your linked tickets.

At 60 days from arrival, you can make FP+s for as long as the duration of your attached tickets are for. If you have AP's, it seems like it's essentially "forever" from that point..but only up to 10 days in advance (ie: 60 days from that date, plus ten more days after).

That's how it worked for me about 30 days ago when I made our FP+ selections. 4 of us had 5 day base tickets, and one of us had a 6 day base ticket (all via UCT). We have a DVC ressie at AKV. I was able to, at the 60 day mark, make FP+ selections for 5 days for our entire party...and could have made one more for "me".

We're going to price bridge the other 4 tickets to 6 day base when we get there. Essentially, I had 60+5 (+6 in reality...I left a mid week Epcot day open...we'll take care of those after we bridge. Also, no parks on arrival and departure day).

The thing I didn't test, and would love to see someone test, is how far you can push that +x window. Since non-expiry tickets have 14 days from first use to use their days...I wonder if you could get up to +14 (booking your first FP+ on day after arrival, and then booking another day 14 days after your first FP+), so long as you don't book more than your tickets allotment of days. Does that make sense? Anyone try it?

 

[Laketravis]

The thing I didn't test, and would love to see someone test, is how far you can push that +x window. Since non-expiry tickets have 14 days from first use to use their days...I wonder if you could get up to +14 (booking your first FP+ on day after arrival, and then booking another day 14 days after your first FP+), so long as you don't book more than your tickets allotment of days. Does that make sense? Anyone try it?

If I understand correctly what you are describing, that is exactly what I was able to do with 10 day park hoppers at the 60 day mark over a two+ week stay.

I made FP+ reservations for day 1, skipped some days, and made our 10th ticket day reservations on day 14.

If I recall correctly, the span of the allowed calendar days was equal to our resort reservation (14 days). It wouldn't let me schedule FP+ beyond that, but it would let me schedule FP's over a span of more than 10 days.