AP's to get 20 FP+ per quarter

[Sammie]

As far as the OP, it is just a rumor. There is no official information on ANY quantities for anyone at this point.

Thanks, I have read the website restrictions over and over, and never saw anything that listed amounts. I have seen first hand reports from those that participated in the testing and did not see it.

I just thought maybe I was looking in the wrong place.

 

[Time Traveler]

Is there any clue of when Fastpass+ is going to be fully implemented? I imagine that it's still pretty far away, though I'm curious as to if I should worry about it for our next trip.

 

[MAGICFOR2]

it seems that they are wasting a lot of money putting these everywhere. The whole FP plus illusion is based on this. They are all in. This does crack me up. Is there one for the movie in France.

We don't go on too many of the small rides - we get the big ones done and walk around a little, maybe sit down a little more - this is not going to make us shop more as Disney hopes, because our souvenier budget won't change, even if touring style does. Maybe we will take more time to play mini golf or play the games at the resort pool. I think they are shooting themselves in the foot by making your options more lame. That's why we haven't been back to US. Not willing to pay for the front of the line pass, and the small rides are lame.

On a funny note - I was just on the phone explaining the FP+ system to DDIL, who has been to DL, but will be at WDW for the first time this Summer. She said, "you know what Disney needs to do? They need to have a website where you can sign up for which rides you want to ride and when, and then there would be no lines!"

 

[MAGICFOR2]

Leave. Fastpass. Alone (!!!!)

That.

 

[bcrook]

We don't go on too many of the small rides - we get the big ones done and walk around a little, maybe sit down a little more - this is not going to make us shop more as Disney hopes, because our souvenier budget won't change, even if touring style does. Maybe we will take more time to play mini golf or play the games at the resort pool. I think they are shooting themselves in the foot by making your options more lame. That's why we haven't been back to US. Not willing to pay for the front of the line pass, and the small rides are lame.

On a funny note - I was just on the phone explaining the FP+ system to DDIL, who has been to DL, but will be at WDW for the first time this Summer. She said, "you know what Disney needs to do? They need to have a website where you can sign up for which rides you want to ride and when, and then there would be no lines!"

well it does sound like a cool idea!

 

[Squidgyness]

And at that point we take ALL (rather than just the accomodations) of our vacation dollars elsewhere. And I know I'm not the only one. Will we go back, sure. But it may be once or twice more in our youngest daughters lifetime rather than every 18 - 24 months. We simply don't want to stay in sub-standard hotel rooms for twice (or more) the price we could pay for an offiste condo (or house) that is much nicer than the Deluxe resorts. I simply can't believe that this is what Disney wants. That is why I find it very hard to believe that off-site guest will be excluded from the FP+ "experiance"

To clarify I consider the value resorts Substandard The rest are just overpriced

This.

To start with, I think people underestimate the number of off site guests who go to the parks. There wouldn't be so many offsite hotels if people didn't use them, even if some usage is down to business, we always saw a lot of tourists in ours, most going to the parks. I really, really don't think that fast pass+ will tempt more than a small proportion of these to stay onsite. More than likely it would alienate some people. Take people from the uk for example, a lot of them go to villas and off site hotels, and I know a lot of other international visitors do the same thing. Most of my friends have said they wouldn't stay on Disney property for fast pass plus, as its just too expensive, and some say they would stay away. The only one who said they would like to use it already stays onsite anyway!

Obviously my experiences are limited. But consider this.

Many people go to Disney once or twice in a lifetime. Many do not research it, so would only find out about fast pass plus if they saw it whilst booking onsite anyway. Disney needs to spend some serious cash to advertise it or first time visitors who choose to stay offsite may find themselves unaware till they see these people getting the perks of fp, causing jealousy. It already happens with normal fast pass!

For the repeat visitors, most who want to stay onsite do, most who don't, don't. They do this for a reason that often goes beyond a perk or several in fact, down to their general personality, likes and overriding concerns like budget. If they are told they will effectively be penalised for staying offsite by having one less perk, I seriously doubt their reaction will be scrambling to book onsite, more likely mild annoyance, anger, irritation, resignation, all of the above in some cases. We already get a shed load less perks as a trade off for space and price, adding one more thing we don't get isn't really going to change anything, and if it does its likely for the worse.

I don't think it's a good approach. Who are they targeting? They don't really seem to have made that clear. Is it the first time visitor who is clueless? The seasoned vet? The off site regulars? The locals? Planners? Happy go lucky people? People in the middle of all these things? It all seems a little vague tbh. I think their expectations are a little inflated.

That's not even going into the whole people will spend more in shops argument. Disney management need to realise most people go with a set amount of money and spend that, and no more! Certainly these days! I doubt the majority would dramatically go over their budgets because of more free time.

IMO, fp+ won't make it less complicated, most likely wont convert people from off site in the numbers they want and need to offset costs, and may well not result in a sizeable uptick in spending at the parks. They really should have kept fast pass as it was, and plowed the money into staffing and maintenance instead. Or even more advertising, if you want to go down that route.

This is all just my opinion of course. But if this comes to pass, I don't think ill be visiting much in the future, and that's the extent of my influence in this situation. YMMV folks.

 

[lugnut33]

Look, if Disney can use FP+ to spread out the crowds more, and then with the new FL expansion, conceivably the MK could hold 150,000 people per day instead of 75K. Imagine the ROI with those numbers. That's why FP+ is such a big deal the Disney management.

You must look at this as a money making deal because that is how Disney looks at everything.

 

[Planogirl]

Look, if Disney can use FP+ to spread out the crowds more, and then with the new FL expansion, conceivably the MK could hold 150,000 people per day instead of 75K. Imagine the ROI with those numbers. That's why FP+ is such a big deal the Disney management.

You must look at this as a money making deal because that is how Disney looks at everything.

I guess that I'm not as interested in how Disney makes money as in how I spend it. I get what you're saying though but sometimes plans backfire. Even at Disney.

 

[mbrittb00]

This.

To start with, I think people underestimate the number of off site guests who go to the parks. There wouldn't be so many offsite hotels if people didn't use them, even if some usage is down to business, we always saw a lot of tourists in ours, most going to the parks. I really, really don't think that fast pass+ will tempt more than a small proportion of these to stay onsite. More than likely it would alienate some people. Take people from the uk for example, a lot of them go to villas and off site hotels, and I know a lot of other international visitors do the same thing. Most of my friends have said they wouldn't stay on Disney property for fast pass plus, as its just too expensive, and some say they would stay away. The only one who said they would like to use it already stays onsite anyway!

Obviously my experiences are limited. But consider this.

Many people go to Disney once or twice in a lifetime. Many do not research it, so would only find out about fast pass plus if they saw it whilst booking onsite anyway. Disney needs to spend some serious cash to advertise it or first time visitors who choose to stay offsite may find themselves unaware till they see these people getting the perks of fp, causing jealousy. It already happens with normal fast pass!

For the repeat visitors, most who want to stay onsite do, most who don't, don't. They do this for a reason that often goes beyond a perk or several in fact, down to their general personality, likes and overriding concerns like budget. If they are told they will effectively be penalised for staying offsite by having one less perk, I seriously doubt their reaction will be scrambling to book onsite, more likely mild annoyance, anger, irritation, resignation, all of the above in some cases. We already get a shed load less perks as a trade off for space and price, adding one more thing we don't get isn't really going to change anything, and if it does its likely for the worse.

I don't think it's a good approach. Who are they targeting? They don't really seem to have made that clear. Is it the first time visitor who is clueless? The seasoned vet? The off site regulars? The locals? Planners? Happy go lucky people? People in the middle of all these things? It all seems a little vague tbh. I think their expectations are a little inflated.

That's not even going into the whole people will spend more in shops argument. Disney management need to realise most people go with a set amount of money and spend that, and no more! Certainly these days! I doubt the majority would dramatically go over their budgets because of more free time.

IMO, fp+ won't make it less complicated, most likely wont convert people from off site in the numbers they want and need to offset costs, and may well not result in a sizeable uptick in spending at the parks. They really should have kept fast pass as it was, and plowed the money into staffing and maintenance instead. Or even more advertising, if you want to go down that route.

This is all just my opinion of course. But if this comes to pass, I don't think ill be visiting much in the future, and that's the extent of my influence in this situation. YMMV folks.

+1 Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[mbrittb00]

Look, if Disney can use FP+ to spread out the crowds more, and then with the new FL expansion, conceivably the MK could hold 150,000 people per day instead of 75K. Imagine the ROI with those numbers. That's why FP+ is such a big deal the Disney management.

You must look at this as a money making deal because that is how Disney looks at everything.

But spreading people around the park better, doesn't make them money. The only way for it to generate more revenue is to get more people in the park. Reducing the experience (i.e. fewer FPs) and alienating your return guests isn't a good start.

 

[bcrook]

But spreading people around the park better, doesn't make them money. The only way for it to generate more revenue is to get more people in the park. Reducing the experience (i.e. fewer FPs) and alienating your return guests isn't a good start.

Spreading people around the park would theoretically get people out of lines. Theoretically waits in ridelines would be shorter and people would be enjoying the little things in the parks. If this worked, they wouldn't have to build more rides to disperse crowds. Thus saving money and not adding more maintenance, and possibly making more money from people spread through the parks shopping and eating and not in lines.

But to implement this grand plan, they may have spent over a billion dollars. It sounds like lunacy though. And I think the RFID reader at the hall of presidents is proof positive.

 

[Laketravis]

Spreading people around the park would theoretically get people out of lines. Theoretically waits in ridelines would be shorter and people would be enjoying the little things in the parks. If this worked, they wouldn't have to build more rides to disperse crowds. Thus saving money and not adding more maintenance, and possibly making more money from people spread through the parks shopping and eating and not in lines.

But to implement this grand plan, they may have spent over a billion dollars. It sounds like lunacy though. And I think the RFID reader at the hall of presidents is proof positive.

The more I research "Yield Management" and how others have applied this to theme parks, the more I understand what WDW is trying to do and can see what the future of FP+ is. Every step they take towards this is classical in theory. While there are several possible and anticipated results, the one I selfishly hope will materialize is that crowd levels will be considerably reduced because the efforts that WDW will institute to address increased demand will inadvertantly reduce actual demand.

 

[bcrook]

The more I research "Yield Management" and how others have applied this to theme parks, the more I understand what WDW is trying to do and can see what the future of FP+ is. Every step they take towards this is classical in theory. While there are several possible and anticipated results, the one I selfishly hope will materialize is that crowd levels will be considerably reduced because the efforts that WDW will institute to address increased demand will inadvertantly reduce actual demand.

After reading several articles on this, you have to be right on yield management. This does reinforce the idea that none of this FP + is about providing a new and exciting attraction or experience for guests. It is about changing the management model. Marketing may be able to spin it, but it is what is.

Can you suggest any good articles on yield management in the theme park industry?

 

[bcrook]

The more I research "Yield Management" and how others have applied this to theme parks, the more I understand what WDW is trying to do and can see what the future of FP+ is. Every step they take towards this is classical in theory. While there are several possible and anticipated results, the one I selfishly hope will materialize is that crowd levels will be considerably reduced because the efforts that WDW will institute to address increased demand will inadvertantly reduce actual demand.

So I guess dynamic pricing along with tiered fastpass ticket options will be unveiled at some time.

 

[pampam]

I wonder if RFID will be a way they try to control BTG, cheerleader groups etc. There have been so many complaints about abuse of the FP that they surely must be trying something else.

 

[bauer1168]

I wonder if RFID will be a way they try to control BTG, cheerleader groups etc. There have been so many complaints about abuse of the FP that they surely must be trying something else.

Interesting point. I'm sure that would be better than being stuck behind the tour leader who is in the FP queue with say, 50 FPs in their hand for the group. The flip side could be that if they use FP+, their will be a chunk of FP+ slot times gone, especially in July, August, January when there are several tour groups in each park.

 

[mom2rtk]

the one I selfishly hope will materialize is that crowd levels will be considerably reduced because the efforts that WDW will institute to address increased demand will inadvertantly reduce actual demand.

I think that is a very real possiility.

A certain subset of the population will be easily manipulated. But I don't think it's a large enough subset.

 

[mbrittb00]

The more I research "Yield Management" and how others have applied this to theme parks, the more I understand what WDW is trying to do and can see what the future of FP+ is. Every step they take towards this is classical in theory. While there are several possible and anticipated results, the one I selfishly hope will materialize is that crowd levels will be considerably reduced because the efforts that WDW will institute to address increased demand will inadvertantly reduce actual demand.

Is yield management somehow going to make fewer people want to ride say Space Mountain, thus making that line shorter? Otherwise I only see this me system meaning more long lines for me

 

[dawnhaze]

Is yield management somehow going to make fewer people want to ride say Space Mountain, thus making that line shorter? Otherwise I only see this me system meaning more long lines for me

I think the idea is to create a system that spreads the long lines at major attractions out across all the attractions in the parks. I'm not an expert though.

 

[bcrook]

Is yield management somehow going to make fewer people want to ride say Space Mountain, thus making that line shorter? Otherwise I only see this me system meaning more long lines for me

It looks to me the trend in theme parks is to head down the same road as airlines and hotels with dynamic pricing and tiered experiences. In everything I am reading, the first thing the parks need is data about everything a patron is doing and spending.(RFID bracelets). This company's webpage is enlightening. The second change is setting up unique pricing structures that change from day to day based on demand. ML baseball teams have introduced this in the last few years, and hotels and airlines have been using it for decades. This article does a nice job of explaining.

If ticket prices go up significantly during the crazy busy times, less people will go, but revenue remains the same, the experience is better for those that can afford it. During the off times, if they lower the ticket prices, more people flock to the parks and revenue increases. I also think within in this system there will a tiered level of touring. If you are willing to pay, you can have lots of FP+. If you can't afford that option, please enjoy off kilter, the affection station, and a lovely ride on the riverboat. And don't forget to order your sausage roll and yuengling in advance from Min and Bills, they will have it waiting for you at exactly 11:45 for you to pick up.