Average Day at MK- Rope Drop, Crowds, and Wait Times

[Princess Jes]

Is there a full year comparison as per the OP?
That would then take into account the peak, off-peak, holiday and event peaks and troughs.

 

[Planogirl]

Simple logic would lead one to believe that lines for secondary attractions would be longer. If more people are being kept out of headliner queues because they have FP+ then they have to go somewhere. I would bet that quite a few will jump into another queue. I doubt that they just mill around outside the rides and shows and I also doubt that significant numbers of them go eat and shop. Again, someone can only eat so much and shopping gets a bit monotonous to say the least.

 

[wisblue]

Simple logic would lead one to believe that lines for secondary attractions would be longer. If more people are being kept out of headliner queues because they have FP+ then they have to go somewhere. I would bet that quite a few will jump into another queue. I doubt that they just mill around outside the rides and shows and I also doubt that significant numbers of them go eat and shop. Again, someone can only eat so much and shopping gets a bit monotonous to say the least.

I'm not convinced that it's that simple because there are a lot of factors at work interacting with each other. For example, some people may just choose to spend less time in the parks instead of waiting in lines if they have been able to experience their favorite attractions with FPs at times they chose. By contrast, if someone got a paper FP at noon with a return time 3 hours or more later, they might hang around to use that FP and spend some of that time standing in standby lines.

Or maybe they spend more of their time on the true "anytime" attractions like Hall of Presidents, Country Bears, Carousel of Progress, Tiki Room, etc.

Which is why I am more interested in looking at facts about whether standby lines are longer and, if so, by how much, than discussing the theory of why they should or shouldn't be longer.

 

[Princess Jes]

Which is why I am more interested in looking at facts about whether standby lines are longer and, if so, by how much, than discussing the theory of why they should or shouldn't be longer.

In order to do this more accurately, you need a 12 month period both with legacy FP and FP+ and average the wait times for the whole year as this captures all the high and low crowd periods

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

In order to do this more accurately, you need a 12 month period both with legacy FP and FP+ and average the wait times for the whole year as this captures all the high and low crowd periods

Certainly. I do think it will reveal a pattern that is consistently in direct relation to crowds in prior years, though. Because to be even more accurate, attendance numbers cannot be ignored. It isn't just the crowds. It is the number of people those crowds consist of.

If a level 10 day or a level 1 day has 10% more in attendance than 4 years ago, then that is an important factor in an increased standby wait. For some reason, this seems to be disregarded in conversation with people insisting crowds were the same as a previous visit.

*Speaking only for me*--the crowds seem heavier at any given time to me. A pattern we (my family) has noticed over the years of regular and semi-regular attendance.

So we can discuss level 10 days pre and post the introduction of FP+ until we are blue on the face...but what was the number of guests that composed that level 10 day? Without that information, comparisons aren't accurate.

One thing I noticed is that the comparison posted is for one guest. Yes he offers pad to attempt to account for stroller parking. But it is an ideal that could be followed. But as your party size grows, mobility issues are taken into account and the bladder size of a 3yo that warrants frequent "I gotta go potty NOW" bathroom breaks...that all might blow a hole into the plan. But it is still good to know what might and can be accomplished in the current system. But variables that have nothing to do with FP+ will still cause kinks in the day.

(Also--I think comparison charts do exist. And also--I am noticing more reports of folks returning nonplussed that FP+ made a negative impact on how they did things.)

 

[itchin2go]

And also--I am noticing more reports of folks returning nonplussed that FP+ made a negative impact on how they did things.)

Yeah - I think this is because most people don't "feel" a 2 minute increase, just for instance. For us, if the wait was 15 minutes last time (pre FP+) and it's 20 minutes now, that's just not something we are going to (a) notice much and (b) be particularly perturbed by.

There may very well have been longer waits for secondary attractions on our last trip, but the simple fact is, we didn't perceive this to be the case. So either we're "la la la-everything-is-great-we're-in-Disney" kind of people, or the lines were just not THAT much longer. In my case, take into account that we typically visited at less busy times (January and October), and our sole FP+ trip was Thanksgiving week (which, just by virtue of the time frame certainly had an attendance bump from when we last visited). And we still didn't notice appreciable differences in standby lines.

One caveat is that we're rope droppers, and we don't hang around for that super busy afternoon time frame.

Anyway, I say all this because I hope it's good news for those planning their first FP+ trips.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Itchin', you may be right.

We would feel if waits doubled. But not the incidental increases.

Like you we are rope droppers. We don't often leave in the afternoon. But after lunch, it's like our get up and go had got up and went and our pace becomes relaxed and leisurely finding alternate things to do. This weekend, though, due to heat--the alternate seemed to be the pool.

 

[wisblue]

Yeah - I think this is because most people don't "feel" a 2 minute increase, just for instance. For us, if the wait was 15 minutes last time (pre FP+) and it's 20 minutes now, that's just not something we are going to (a) notice much and (b) be particularly perturbed by.

There may very well have been longer waits for secondary attractions on our last trip, but the simple fact is, we didn't perceive this to be the case. So either we're "la la la-everything-is-great-we're-in-Disney" kind of people, or the lines were just not THAT much longer. In my case, take into account that we typically visited at less busy times (January and October), and our sole FP+ trip was Thanksgiving week (which, just by virtue of the time frame certainly had an attendance bump from when we last visited). And we still didn't notice appreciable differences in standby lines.

One caveat is that we're rope droppers, and we don't hang around for that super busy afternoon time frame.

Anyway, I say all this because I hope it's good news for those planning their first FP+ trips.

This really gets at the bigger point I'm trying to make. It isn't whether some rides now have 5 or 10 minute longer standby waits at the same time of day with a similar overall crowd size as they did before.

I'm really more interested in refuting the idea that standby waits are so much longer for so much of the day that they will have a significant impact on your day. Regardless of the exact amounts, it is clearly false to say that certain rides like POC or HM or IASW were always walk ons or virtual walk ons before FP+ came around. The data from Touring Plans (which I consider reliable) clearly indicates that it was not unusual for these attractions to occasionally have wait times of 20-30 minutes on an average day, and even longer on the busiest days.

Similarly, the current data shows that these attractions frequently have wait times of 20 minutes or less now, and not just on the least crowded days. As always, if you use an efficient touring plan that uses FPs and takes advantage of early and/or late hours to enjoy the attractions that draw the biggest lines, you should have no trouble doing several major attractions with short waits.

 

[mesaboy2]

There are precious few "facts" and actual, useful data regarding the impact of FP+ available to any of us, since Disney is so protective of that information. Almost everything claimed a "fact" in these kinds of threads is either anecdotal, cherry-picked, skewed by personal perception ("it's crowded!"), or culled from WDW's own dubious wait times info by third parties and then interpreted by someone with a silly agenda. About the only facts we get straight from Disney come from quarterly shareholder's meetings and are far too general to be useful to us or an average park guest.

So in the end these back-and-forths are little more than that, with each side claiming "facts" and "data" to refute the other side's "opinions" and "assumptions" when in truth nobody knows much of anything. Everyone has their own experiences and can make up their own minds, and trying to refute others' ideas is pretty pointless.

But carry on.

 

[notfrostyjosh]

There are precious few "facts" and actual, useful data regarding the impact of FP+ available to any of us, since Disney is so protective of that information. Almost everything claimed a "fact" in these kinds of threads is either anecdotal, cherry-picked, skewed by personal perception ("it's crowded!"), or culled from WDW's own dubious wait times info by third parties and then interpreted by someone with a silly agenda. About the only facts we get straight from Disney come from quarterly shareholder's meetings and are far too general to be useful to us or an average park guest.

So in the end these back-and-forths are little more than that, with each side claiming "facts" and "data" to refute the other side's "opinions" and "assumptions" when in truth nobody knows much of anything. Everyone has their own experiences and can make up their own minds, and trying to refute others' ideas is pretty pointless.

But carry on.

But... but... I'm armed with one day's worth of posted wait times.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

There are precious few "facts" and actual, useful data regarding the impact of FP+ available to any of us, since Disney is so protective of that information. Almost everything claimed a "fact" in these kinds of threads is either anecdotal, cherry-picked, skewed by personal perception ("it's crowded!"), or culled from WDW's own dubious wait times info by third parties and then interpreted by someone with a silly agenda. About the only facts we get straight from Disney come from quarterly shareholder's meetings and are far too general to be useful to us or an average park guest.

So in the end these back-and-forths are little more than that, with each side claiming "facts" and "data" to refute the other side's "opinions" and "assumptions" when in truth nobody knows much of anything. Everyone has their own experiences and can make up their own minds, and trying to refute others' ideas is pretty pointless.

But carry on.

I hope this reminder was given often when folks discussed park touring and crowd calendars with paper fast pass.

Because if those were legit means to discuss park touring before, then they are legit now. Since Disney likes to keep it all to themselves, it is all that we have as far as data is concerned. FP+ didn't suddenly make such data worthless. And it is still data. It may be imperfect data, but observations are...data.

 

[mesaboy2]

I hope this reminder was given often when folks discussed park touring and crowd calendars with paper fast pass.

Because if those were legit means to discuss park touring before, then they are legit now. Since Disney likes to keep it all to themselves, it is all that we have as far as data is concerned. FP+ didn't suddenly make such data worthless. And it is still data. It may be imperfect data, but observations are...data.

There is some useful park touring data in the OP in the form of general advice that has always been true, nothing new there. If you're asking if I tried to give realistic advice before FP+...yes, I'd like to think so.

But this "reminder" was given in the context of a thread that appears to me designed to continue the neverending FP/FP+ debate by claiming facts and data to support one "side" and poking holes in (some hyperbolic) points of the other. So with that in mind, my PP would make no sense before FP+.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

There is some useful park touring data in the OP in the form of general advice that has always been true, nothing new there. If you're asking if I tried to give realistic advice before FP+...yes, I'd like to think so.

But this "reminder" was given in the context of a thread that appears to me designed to continue the neverending FP/FP+ debate by claiming facts and data to support one "side" and poking holes in (some hyperbolic) points of the other. So with that in mind, my PP would make no sense before FP+.

It remains interesting none the less. And you are right, it would make no sense before. I guess I don't see why it would make sense now except by your own explanation. Then it is crystal clear.

 

[wisblue]

But... but... I'm armed with one day's worth of posted wait times.

Well, one full day's worth of posted wait times is worth more than one person's anecdotal observation.

And, when people say that a ride like POC always has waits of over 30 minutes or more now and that it was always a walk on before FP+, even one full day's worth of wait times will refute that.

I seem to recall you saying a few months ago that average wait times at POC were up about 30%. And that was when POC was operating at less than full capacity because they weren't using the last row of the boats.That would mean that an average wait of 15 minutes is now 20 minutes and a wait of 30 minutes is now more like 40 minutes. Not, if you were used to a wait time of 10 minutes it is now probably 45 minutes at the same time of day on a day with a similar crowd.

 

[Princess Jes]

Certainly. I do think it will reveal a pattern that is consistently in direct relation to crowds in prior years, though. Because to be even more accurate, attendance numbers cannot be ignored. It isn't just the crowds. It is the number of people those crowds consist of.

If a level 10 day or a level 1 day has 10% more in attendance than 4 years ago, then that is an important factor in an increased standby wait. For some reason, this seems to be disregarded in conversation with people insisting crowds were the same as a previous visit.

*Speaking only for me*--the crowds seem heavier at any given time to me. A pattern we (my family) has noticed over the years of regular and semi-regular attendance.

So we can discuss level 10 days pre and post the introduction of FP+ until we are blue on the face...but what was the number of guests that composed that level 10 day? Without that information, comparisons aren't accurate.

One thing I noticed is that the comparison posted is for one guest. Yes he offers pad to attempt to account for stroller parking. But it is an ideal that could be followed. But as your party size grows, mobility issues are taken into account and the bladder size of a 3yo that warrants frequent "I gotta go potty NOW" bathroom breaks...that all might blow a hole into the plan. But it is still good to know what might and can be accomplished in the current system. But variables that have nothing to do with FP+ will still cause kinks in the day.

(Also--I think comparison charts do exist. And also--I am noticing more reports of folks returning nonplussed that FP+ made a negative impact on how they did things.)

Well that's a simple calculation.
If crowd numbers increased by 5% in total then you just apply that to the wait times and you've got comparable wait times.

And wait times dont take into account children who need to go potty now because it's irrelevant. So the comparison for one person doesn't seem ridiculous at all. One person would stand in a regular standby line just as long as a group of 3, or 5 or 7.
Touring plans however do try to accommodate for that by being able to adjust walking speed and add in breaks.
Having s child or mobility issues are no different now than they were with paper fast pass, you just know when your window is in advance rather than running around the morning of to find out once you collected paper FP.

 

[wisblue]

Well that's a simple calculation.
If crowd numbers increased by 5% in total then you just apply that to the wait times and you've got comparable wait times.

It isn't that simple. As more people enter a park they don't distribute themselves evenly across all attractions.

For example, with a crowd of a certain size a ride like the mine train might have a wait time of 75 minutes and a ride like IASW might have a wait like 15 minutes. But, with a larger crowd the line for IASW is going to grow to 30 minutes a lot faster than 7DMT is going to grow to 2 1/2 hours.

You can see this effect if you compare wait times on a very slow day with the wait times on the busiest days of the year.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Well that's a simple calculation.
If crowd numbers increased by 5% in total then you just apply that to the wait times and you've got comparable wait times.

And wait times dont take into account children who need to go potty now because it's irrelevant. So the comparison for one person doesn't seem ridiculous at all. One person would stand in a regular standby line just as long as a group of 3, or 5 or 7.
Touring plans however do try to accommodate for that by being able to adjust walking speed and add in breaks.
Having s child or mobility issues are no different now than they were with paper fast pass, you just know when your window is in advance rather than running around the morning of to find out once you collected paper FP.

My comment was on a touring plan that accounted for stroller parking but not other family realities. If we are going to pick it apart. Such delays *could* make the plan less reliable. Also, since it was one person, it doesn't take into account what happens when you have a large group of people. While wait
Times would be unaffected, being able to hit attractions when the plan suggests to do so, could cause you to arrive later. So instead of adding because you are ahead of schedule, you are dropping because you are behind. While Physical wait times are not affected, when you hit the attraction for the optimum wait time for the time of day and crowd level and area you are in--would be.

So real life example--my family rode Kali with a 20 minute wait yesterday. Just a little while later (half hour from
When they entered the line), the line grew to nearly an hour. I don't know if that was reliable. Their wait time board was not working and my girls who rode when that was the claim did not take that long (but longer than 20 minutes)--but it is just a demonstration of what a difference half hour could make. Back to Pottying and large groups--a minute here and a minute there could eventually add up to being 30 minutes or more behind schedule.

But more on point, the plan is the prevailing suggestion and it is great that it could be achieved. But when group size magnifies, results may indeed vary. A group of 8 will do less than a group of 1.

I was not suggesting that the results were invalid. What I was suggesting was that times were accounting for stroller parking, but no other situations.

Again--since people were suggesting that the results had issues when considering other factors. The factors I presented were no less irrelevant as it pertains to wait times and quantity of attractions that could be reasonably accomplished in a day.

*additionally, increased attendance is often ignored when explaining wits time increases.

 

[Princess Jes]

It isn't that simple. As more people enter a park they don't distribute themselves evenly across all attractions.

For example, with a crowd of a certain size a ride like the mine train might have a wait time of 75 minutes and a ride like IASW might have a wait like 15 minutes. But, with a larger crowd the line for IASW is going to grow to 30 minutes a lot faster than 7DMT is going to grow to 2 1/2 hours.

You can see this effect if you compare wait times on a very slow day with the wait times on the busiest days of the year.

Perhaps, but with all statistical analysis, assumptions must be made. That's why I said "average"

My comment was on a touring plan that accounted for stroller parking but not other family realities. If we are going to pick it apart. Such delays *could* make the plan less reliable. Also, since it was one person, it doesn't take into account what happens when you have a large group of people. While wait
Times would be unaffected, being able to hit attractions when the plan suggests to do so, could cause you to arrive later. So instead of adding because you are ahead of schedule, you are dropping because you are behind. While Physical wait times are not affected, when you hit the attraction for the optimum wait time for the time of day and crowd level and area you are in--would be.

So real life example--my family rode Kali with a 20 minute wait yesterday. Just a little while later (half hour from
When they entered the line), the line grew to nearly an hour. I don't know if that was reliable. Their wait time board was not working and my girls who rode when that was the claim did not take that long (but longer than 20 minutes)--but it is just a demonstration of what a difference half hour could make. Back to Pottying and large groups--a minute here and a minute there could eventually add up to being 30 minutes or more behind schedule.

But more on point, the plan is the prevailing suggestion and it is great that it could be achieved. But when group size magnifies, results may indeed vary. A group of 8 will do less than a group of 1.

I was not suggesting that the results were invalid. What I was suggesting was that times were accounting for stroller parking, but no other situations.

Again--since people were suggesting that the results had issues when considering other factors. The factors I presented were no less irrelevant as it pertains to wait times and quantity of attractions that could be reasonably accomplished in a day.

*additionally, increased attendance is often ignored when explaining wits time increases.

Isn't this thread primarily about FastPass vs fastpass + when touring as opposed to touring plans?

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Perhaps, but with all statistical analysis, assumptions must be made. That's why I said "average"


Isn't this thread primarily about FastPass vs fastpass + when touring as opposed to touring plans?

Did you read the link?

That is what I am referencing. The cheat sheet is a touring plan. It accounts for stroller parking. And it was followed by one person quite well.

You have suggestions on what would make the comparisons better. And I added to that. You suggested that for it to be more accurate...

So I have further info on what would make it even more accurate.

And the article was whether the cheat sheet works in be current system as suggested. It did not include an old cheat sheet under the old system. That makes sense since it was not comparing the two systems but rather tested how well his advised plan worked in reality.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Well, one full day's worth of posted wait times is worth more than one person's anecdotal observation.

With the reports of inaccurate posted wait times on both sides (both higher and lower waits than posted), I would disagree with this. I just don't feel they are reliable any more. And they seem to be less reliable now than they were in the past (from numerous discussions here anyway), so I don't even know that comparing posted wait times is really an apples to apples comparison anymore. I certainly don't take any issue with people using them for comparisons - as mesaboy pointed out, there is precious little data to work from in the first place, so I'm all for using what's available. But I do find people's experiences - both positive and negative - equally valuable in creating strategies to best use the system Disney has put in place.

That's what I love about the DIS so much - people coming and sharing what did and didn't work for them, helping each other, and sharing a love of Disney. Data just doesn't do that.