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

[bcrook]

I think you're exactly backwards. On the 18th, there will be TWO groups, onsite and offsite/AP. Adding just AP wouldn't be enough people on a random Wednesday for a test.

AP holders who have stayed in a Disney hotel are kind of like on site guests except they are limited in # of days they can schedule in advance.

Are Ap holders who have never stayed at Disney hotel just like off site guests?

 

[ArwenMarie]

I think you're exactly backwards. On the 18th, there will be TWO groups, onsite and offsite/AP. Adding just AP wouldn't be enough people on a random Wednesday for a test.

No, three. There are all of the APs who have already unlocked FP+ access by a resort stay.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

AP holders who have stayed in a Disney hotel are kind of like on site guests except they are limited in # of days they can schedule in advance.

Are Ap holders who have never stayed at Disney hotel just like off site guests?

Right, that's what I was saying. So it's either 4 groups or two.

 

[bcrook]

No, three. There are all of the APs who have already unlocked FP+ access by a resort stay.

And then you have swan and dolphin guests who have all kinds of FP+ voodoo going on. They can book from their hotel on the day of without fighting with the in park kiosks. They can have the concierge system grab them some Safari before they leave. If I read those reports correctly.

 

[ArwenMarie]

AP holders who have stayed in a Disney hotel are kind of like on site guests except they are limited in # of days they can schedule in advance.

Are Ap holders who have never stayed at Disney hotel just like off site guests?

Right, there seem to be rules built in already for APs.

APs who haven't stayed onsite and unlocked FP+ somehow are being treated just like off-guests for now. But one would think that eventually they will lift that loophole and the current AP rules will apply to all APs.

That's where I see the three groups emerging...
1. Onsite (with a valid ticket, whether AP or not)
2. APs not onsite, whether local or otherwise (once they open up FP+ access for all APs and that loophole becomes irrelevant)
3. Offsite without APs.

I'm guessing onsite (whether AP or not) will have access as we see it now (60 + length of stay). APs will have access according the rules that the current APs who got the loophole to work have, as you mentioned above.

Finally, what about offsite without APs? Why are they doing this DAK test? Perhaps offsite without APs won't have prebooking access? I can't think of any other reason for them to do this test.

 

[bcrook]

Right, that's what I was saying. So it's either 4 groups or two.

Or five!

 

[csmith041177]

Our last trip was 1 year ago, and our next trip will be next November. Sounds like I have a lot of home work to do before then...

 

[ArwenMarie]

Right, that's what I was saying. So it's either 4 groups or two.

Right now it could be seen as 4 if you divide APs into two groups. But that seems to be a loophole that will eventually be lifted. Right now, APs without a resort stay are being treated like offsite. But the two AP groups will merge at some point.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

Our last trip was 1 year ago, and our next trip will be next November. Sounds like I have a lot of home work to do before then...

All current information is probably irrelevant to next November. You don't need to start paying attention until next fall.

 

[bcrook]

Finally, what about offsite without APs? Why are they doing this DAK test? Perhaps offsite without APs won't have prebooking access? I can't think of any other reason for them to do this test.

This test is more about making EVERYBODY stick with three FP and that is it. This is testing how that will work with NO same day FP- for anyone.

It makes sense it is happening at DAK, it has the lowest ride capacity. There simply isn't enough ride slots to accommodate everybody in the park. This is why Pandora should have been built two years ago.

 

[clsteve]

Right, there seem to be rules built in already for APs.

APs who haven't stayed onsite and unlocked FP+ somehow are being treated just like off-guests for now. But one would think that eventually they will lift that loophole and the current AP rules will apply to all APs.

That's where I see the three groups emerging...
1. Onsite
2. APs (once they open up FP+ access for all and that loophole becomes irrelevant)
3. Offsite without APs.

I'm guessing onsite (whether AP or not) will have access as we see it now (60 + length of stay). APs will have access according the rules that the current APs who got the loophole to work have, as you mentioned above.

Finally, what about offsite without APs? Why are they doing this DAK test? Perhaps offsite without APs won't have prebooking access? I can't think of any other reason for them to do this test.

I guess they'll at least get to see what the true distribution of FP's in a day is for the groups you just outlined, and they'll get a great feel for the throughput at the kiosks.

They'll also get a chance to see if their FP distribution works to keep people in the Parks longer. Since AK can clear out pretty quick after the parade - wonder what the later afternoon crowds will look like. If it stays busy, that might be an indication it's working.

 

[bcrook]

All current information is probably irrelevant to next November. You don't need to start paying attention until next fall.

Unless the person feels like the return for the money is not as good. The problem is dedicating $10,000 to a trip with a completely unknown system.

I would not book my Wyndham points for bonnet creek next year until I knew that off site guests were going to be included equally.

I would probably use my DVC points without much worries (although mine are used up for 2014). So it is bonnet creek or nothing for me.

 

[ArwenMarie]

This test is more about making EVERYBODY stick with three FP and that is it. This is testing how that will work with NO same day FP- for anyone.

It makes sense it is happening at DAK, it has the lowest ride capacity. There simply isn't enough ride slots to accommodate everybody in the park. This is why Pandora should have been built two years ago.

But what are they testing for...For the reactions of the customers, for how well the kiosks work, for how well their employees do without it...I guess it could be all of the above.

 

[ArwenMarie]

I guess they'll at least get to see what the true distribution of FP's in a day is for the groups you just outlined, and they'll get a great feel for the throughput at the kiosks.

They'll also get a chance to see if their FP distribution works to keep people in the Parks longer. Since AK can clear out pretty quick after the parade - wonder what the later afternoon crowds will look like. If it stays busy, that might be an indication it's working.

Good point..they can test crowd distribution. Making people stay longer, eat more, shop more...

 

[mom2rtk]

Disney is going to be forced to choose who they risk upsetting most. They can offer too few slots for advance FP+, have too few held back for short notice and same day FP+, or allow even less standby riders per hour. The math shows the choice has to be made. Unfortunately, I think we will see some mixture of the 3 in the middle that gives most people a mediocre outcome.

I'm afraid you are right about that.

But at least it will be "fair". Or not.

 

[clsteve]

Good point..they can test crowd distribution. Making people stay longer, eat more, shop more...

Exactly.

Also, they haven't known the full who that are utilizing FP's. FP- machines are almost dumb terminals. They have very basic input/output capability and didn't collect who actually pulled them or who actually used them after they pulled them. This will be the first time they actually know. Especially since it looks like everyone will have to set up an MDE account of some sort at the kiosk.

It's important enough for them to get this info that they're going to put a lot of people through some pain to get it.

 

[morethananyonex]

Well Disney World is a theme park and the main thing is rides, so it's not exactly right for everyone to pay $90+ for admission and have only onsite guests actually able to ride rides without insane waits. If Disney gave FP+ perks to onsite guests then they would lose lots of business from offsite people.

A loyalty program from say a restaurant or department store giving you random coupons or whatever, is far different than paying an insane amount to enter a park and not being able to actually ride anything. The difference between Disney and Universal is the amount of resorts and onsite guests Universal has pales in comparison to Disney World.

Also, paying to stay onsite gives you perks at whatever specific resort you are staying at. I don't see what a resort has to do with the parks...the two are completely different and staying onsite shouldn't extend into better park benefits unless they want to start giving offsite guests discounted tickets to make up for lack of FP availability. After all, lodging and dining does not matter, what matters is that we all pay the same price to enter the parks and should have the same opportunity to experience the parks.

For the record, I can't see Disney implementing a system that completely shuts out offsite guests (from anything but stand by). Universal's system doesn't even completely shut out offsite guests, and they have far fewer onsite guests than Disney. I would be interested to see the percentage of onsite vs offsite at Disney and Universal if anyone knows that though. I also have a hard time seeing how a pay FP+ system or a resort benefit one would work given the limited number of FPs that can actually be given.

That said, I completely disagree with your argument that the parks and resorts are completely separate. The biggest flaw I see there is that Disney owns both and therefore wants to entice people to book their resorts. Resort guests paid for better park access for a long time, just not directly with FP. EMH is (well arguably used to be) a huge perk for onsite guests that excluded offsite guests completely. I would not be surprised to see a system that gives onsite guests more perks, even a system that differentiates based on hotel levels IF the capacity numbers weren't so restrictive. Why wouldn't Disney give the family who spent $4000 to stay onsite more perks than the family who spent $0 to stay onsite?

 

[Mkrop]

So you are saying that all were gone before the park even opened. I find that hard to believe. Not saying your not telling the truth but did you experience that personally. So you mean that all of them are available in advance for book with Fastpass+. That is not what I have been told, that only a percentage are available for advance booking. Cast Members have indicated to us that some FastPass+ reservation times will be held for same-day reservations.

I know on some of the days people on here said everything was gone, I went online and on the day off was able to book many headliners at all parks. In fact on one particular day, they were all available at 9am for that day.

There were many times with legacy that when we showed up at 11am the only thing available was very, very late, or not at all. It is very possible that someone who blocked me out of getting one, had already ridden and pulled another.

Why is that better? The old way I had no way to plan dinner or any thing else, because until I actually pulled the Fastpass, I had no way to know if I was going to get it within the hour, or wait for hours and hours, filling time waiting or even get one at all. Plus I had to use up valuable time going to actual attraction, get a pass or find out they were all gone, only to not ride while I was there. Now I know when I go to the attraction I am actually getting to ride and in a short time frame.

At least this way I can go to another park early, use my booked fastpass+ between 4 and 6 and be at dinner at 7pm, which is a huge improvement over the old way.

The only disadvantage to this system I see, is that you can't get Fastpasses for the headliners more than once, and I personally think that is fair.

We saw firsthand on our DHS day, they run out at 9:25am. DS16 checked, nothing available online.

They could have alleviate it conflicting with ADR by not enforcing return times like they use to. They could alleviate running all over parks by posting signs like they do in Future World with wait times, and FP return times, even if they wanted to do all of this with the app, too. But this FP+ can not handle the capacity.

And I just find it very doubtful that they are going to hold some back for day of, I think you will have a lot of unhappy guests who have expensive hotel rooms and packages booked if they can not book their TSMM FP at the 60, 40 or 30 day mark.

But what if you go to book them and your screen says that? Just playin' with you, R317. But I do imagine some people have uttered the word "maneur" or the likes during this.

Yes that seems "fair"

 

[doconeill]

And then you have swan and dolphin guests who have all kinds of FP+ voodoo going on. They can book from their hotel on the day of without fighting with the in park kiosks. They can have the concierge system grab them some Safari before they leave. If I read those reports correctly.

You couldn't get them at the resort the first week at least. Only the concierge knew anything about it, but all he basically had was a map that showed the locations of the "Swan&Dolphin" marked kiosks, inside the parks.

The kiosks were actually a table with a S&D placard, and a CM with an iPad. She would verify your S&D keycard, then scan your admission card (in my case, an AP). Since my AP was already linked, and I was there with my wife it automagically called up my profile and her linked profile, and could make selections for both of us. The CM basically controlled the whole process but at my direction. She then had me enter my email address so that it could email me the resulting itinerary. I could also see the itinerary in the MDX app - but I couldn't make changes. And I couldn't book additional days either. So it was restricted.

As for whether it activated an AP, no it didn't. I still can't pre-book FPs.

So I'd say we were basically offsite guests for the test.

 

[bcrook]

You couldn't get them at the resort the first week at least. Only the concierge knew anything about it, but all he basically had was a map that showed the locations of the "Swan&Dolphin" marked kiosks, inside the parks.

The kiosks were actually a table with a S&D placard, and a CM with an iPad. She would verify your S&D keycard, then scan your admission card (in my case, an AP). Since my AP was already linked, and I was there with my wife it automagically called up my profile and her linked profile, and could make selections for both of us. The CM basically controlled the whole process but at my direction. She then had me enter my email address so that it could email me the resulting itinerary. I could also see the itinerary in the MDX app - but I couldn't make changes. And I couldn't book additional days either. So it was restricted.

As for whether it activated an AP, no it didn't. I still can't pre-book FPs.

So I'd say we were basically offsite guests for the test.

But you could book from the hotel rather than a kiosk in the park? That would be a slight advantage in regards to the December 18 kiosk day and a different system.