Best Strategy for a trip in 2022? Lower Your Expectations

[TiggerBouncy]

We traveled in the summer, typically the beginning of June, usually 6ish day trips. We always do Magic Kingdom our first full day so day 2. My FP were usually PP, HM & 7DMT. We would RD BTMRR & Splash. I would also get 7DMT towards the end of the trip. I did not have problems With FOP or SDD. I did book slinky for the evening as we wanted to ride at night. Idk why I could book headliners for 10+ and others had trouble.

I don't either. Like I said, you were very very lucky. But history and the threads don't lie. EVERY board was filled back then with how many, many people couldn't get those rides at anything less then 60+2 / 60+4 depending on the ride. I don't know how you could BE on a Disney board and NOT have seen those threads. Like I said, I linked just a few for your benefit and those threads reference many tracking sites (similar to the sites that track G+ availability now) that prove the point. Feel free to do your own search on this - or pretty much any other - Disney board around 2018/2019 time frame.

So all I can say is you should consider yourself lucky that your experience was significantly better than the average.

 

[pixiedust2u]

But you WERE paying for another day at the parks. Any way you slice it, FP+ gave an advantage to someone staying onsite over offsite (costs WAY more) and gave an advantage to staying 5 days over 4 days (which cost you an extra $500+ AT LEAST).

You didn't pay for FP+ DIRECTLY, but what you paid INDIRECTLY was SIGNIFICANTLY more for that 1 day advantage.

Gotcha. Yes I understand onsite guests had more of an advantage. But from a business perspective, they should. Disney should want people to stay in the bubble. Might not be a popular opinion, but if you stay on site I think you should be entitled to more perks. Whether you are paying 200$ a night at POP or 800$ a night at Poly, I think it's more than reasonable and a wise marketing model to entice people to want to stay within the resort.

 

[dijid]

I despise Genie Plus with a passion, however, if you don’t get what you want @ 7 am, standby is an option.

While this thread has turned its focus entirely to G+, it's overlooked some of the earlier complaints about ride shutdowns, or as my husband called them, "rolling blackouts." Those make the standby lines even longer and often unbearable. DH sent me a photo from the standby line at Peter Pan where people had fallen asleep laying on the ground because the line hadn't moved at all in 20 minutes. After wasting a lot of time in that line, they decided to cut their losses and leave. They actually went out and rode the monorail because it was something they could ride without a long wait, and doubled as a place to sit down.

 

[snikki]

Every system benefits one group of people over the other.

We barely utilized the OG FP. Too much running around with small kids or a stroller. I feel it wasn’t the best for those with small children or those who couldn’t maneuver the park like a mad man. If you had someone in your group who was good with keeping track of when you can pull the next FP, separating from the group and running around to all these rides you benefited.

I loved FP+. It benefited someone like me. A planner that stays onsite, takes 9-10 day trips and books almost a year out. On a 10 day ticket I was guaranteed 30 rides! We had days we planned on only doing WS but would pop in somewhere to do our 3 rides. It was amazing.

G+ Is a virtual version of the OG FP. It benefits those who are good with technology and those with the fastest fingers and phones. I planned on upgrading my iPhone soon but I’m going to wait until closer to our trip. Newer phone and I don’t use Disney WiFi. I hope it benefits me somehow.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

Gotcha. Yes I understand onsite guests had more of an advantage. But from a business perspective, they should. Disney should want people to stay in the bubble. Might not be a popular opinion, but if you stay on site I think you should be entitled to more perks. Whether you are paying 200$ a night at POP or 800$ a night at Poly, I think it's more than reasonable and a wise marketing model to entice people to want to stay within the resort.

Oh I don't argue that point at all. As a DVC member I am constantly frustrated by the degradation of onsite perks. Since I always stayed onsite due to DVC and for a week (part of that was because of how FP+ was structured, I got more out of a single longer stay than several shorter stays) FP+ always worked to my personal advantage. Since I was a AP holder, my window started on my checkin day, so my first 'real' day was generally day 3. I could always snag my ride of choice at days 3, 4, 5, and 6 (my park days).

But looking at it objectively, it did not work to the advantage of a lot of people. People like me had a definite clear leg up. We paid more, so I would have considered that 'fair', but it was also 'pay to play'. I.E. those who paid more had an advantage which many people complained about.

We can argue all day about how the system should be structured, what's fair and what we think Disney could have done different... but if they took the complaints above to heart, then clearly not allowing pre-booking is "A" possible way to address the complaints - and one they choose to take.

 

[Grim Grinning Ghostie]

This may be an unpopular opinion, but I miss the days when FPs were spit out from kiosks and were only accessible day-of to people who were physically there, picking up their FPs from the ride itself. Folks who had less time to plan or who went spontaneously weren't hung out to dry, and people weren't waking up at 6:50am to fight for a 5:30pm spot on Frozen Ever After. You can hardly ride anything in the parks these days, even when spending extra money per person for G+.

 

[PaladinButters]

I think it's more than reasonable and a wise marketing model to entice people to want to stay within the resort.

And yet they've gone with the interesting strategy of taking away the perks one by one.

 

[Jennasis]

I don't either. Like I said, you were very very lucky. But history and the threads don't lie. EVERY board was filled back then with how many, many people couldn't get those rides at anything less then 60+2 / 60+4 depending on the ride. I don't know how you could BE on a Disney board and NOT have seen those threads. Like I said, I linked just a few for your benefit and those threads reference many tracking sites (similar to the sites that track G+ availability now) that prove the point. Feel free to do your own search on this - or pretty much any other - Disney board around 2018/2019 time frame.

So all I can say is you should consider yourself lucky that your experience was significantly better than the average.

Not a day went by that i couldn't snap up a headliner attraction day-of in the park with FP+. Back then people could cancel or modify selections easily and did so, and refreshing the screen never failed.

G+ was never about "fixing" FP+. It was them finally having an excuse to charge for line skipping service.

Hey, they want to keep this G+ thing. FINE. But they need to address serious issues (like the bait and switch times, inability to modify, and so on). I don't mind paying for it, but it has to work. They could have just started charging for FP+...but apparently some executive had to earn his big bonus by suggesting a new system with a stupid new name.

Maybe they will "fix" it when they capitalize on the next worldwide disaster.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

This may be an unpopular opinion, but I miss the days when FPs were spit out from kiosks and were only accessible day-of to people who were physically there, picking up their FPs from the ride itself. Folks who had less time to plan or who went spontaneously weren't hung out to dry, and people weren't waking up at 6:50am to fight for a 5:30pm spot on Frozen Ever After. You can hardly ride anything in the parks these days, even when spending extra money per person for G+.

Count me in with that unpopular opinion. I know a lot of younger people are against this concept (they like technology), but I prefer the way it was in the early 2000's. You had to be IN the park and PHYSCIALLY visit the ride. That way it was clear it was your intention to ride it. It's too easy for people to get in a virtual line that they may never actually use - but they get in "in case they are there". I would LOVE to see actual data on how many people use their ride reservations. I know there is a certain percentage of "no shows".

Give me the physically tickets. I am okay with saving paper... but make you go to a machine at the ride and tag in. Although I admit to being on the record as saying that's unfair to people who are handicapped or have small children or elderly grandparents with them.

 

[Westerner]

I think people tend to gloss over the "good old days" of FP+. Go back and look at the threads. You will see HUNDREDS of threads about "NO SDD at 60+3 days" or "I can't get FOP" - one of the reasons why we can't prebook Genie+ selections is because one of the biggest complaints on these and other social media's was that at <whatever days before visit> you couldn't get your SDD or TSMM or FOP or whatever it was you wanted.

The problem with the old FP+ system is that you could book x days + days of your trip. So people who stayed 10 days had an advantage over those staying 3 days and people who stayed 3 days pretty much never got any tier 1 rides. People staying offsite were just up the creek. Every day on here I would see dozens of threads about how Disney was only for the rich who could stay 5+ days onsite and the average person couldn't get their rides because they can't afford a week or couldn't afford the exorbitant prices of staying onsite. Basic going reference was at any time SDD was at 60+3 days and FOP at 60+4.

So now Disney has given you what you asked for. No pro-booking. Fair for all.

It's time to remind people the old adage about "the only thing worse then not getting what you ask for, is getting it".


Some reminders for those who have 'forgotten' the past.
https://www.disboards.com/threads/disappointing-fast-pass-morning-today.3784264
https://www.disboards.com/threads/lack-of-fp-options.3798831
https://www.disboards.com/threads/sdd-at-60-2.3772800
https://www.disboards.com/threads/fastpasses-hard-to-get.3785333
https://www.disboards.com/threads/chances-of-slinky-or-fopassage-fp-at-60-2.3768814
+ thousands more...

Very well said.

Something else I think is being overlooked amidst the frustration over G+ is that FP+ optimization expertise on DIS did not spring up overnight, it grew over a period of time. It wasn't something that could be mastered with an hour of study. Back in August 2019 I came here and read up on FP+ but didn't really get all the 60+X strategies necessary to get the headliners. And I suspect it took more than 1 WDW trip to master it. I think the same is true of G+. Over time, folks will develop greater ability to optimize their G+ day and work around some of its limitations. Things like when it pays to refresh and for what rides. Or knowing when you can afford to sleep in a bit and book at 8:30AM rather than 7. Knowing when an early return time prior to Park Open+2 hrs pays dividends. And ultimately when it pays to buy G+ and when it doesn't.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

G+ was never about "fixing" FP+. It was them finally having an excuse to charge for line skipping service.

Well, so lets be clear on what G+ was. It was never meant to 'fix' FP+ - that's true. CONCEPTUALLY G+ was designed to be a helper application that planned your entire day for you. It was meant to go above rides and give you a cohesive day planning tool - everything from transportation to maps of the park to where to eat to what rides. The concept was to take what you wanted to do and plan the MOST EFFECTIVE route for you to do those things and MAXIMIZE the things you could do by taking into account things like minimal walking distance and anticipated crowds. In addition, using technology, Disney should be able to 'guide' people to spread the crowd evenly across the park so the park is used more consistently and avoid log jams. As a bonus, G+ would be able to suggest activities that many people didn't even know existed.

There are a few problems with the concept. The first is free will. People will never do everything an app tells them. In order for it to work correctly, the majority of the crowd would have to use it and NOT use it to ride hop, but actually use it as intended - go where it tells you to go, not where the latest ride has a brief opening. People are NEVER going to do that.

Also, the technology is not quite there yet. In theory, it's a math problem. Given enough data and enough computing power, G+ should be able to plan everyone's day perfectly so that if everyone followed what it said and went where it told them and all the rides worked all the time and the restaurants served a predictable amount of people then everyone would be able to do what G+ told them they could do at the beginning of the day. Starting the day at a predictable time and preplanned prior, G+ should be able to tell you everything that you wanted and what you would not be able to do. Ideally it would tell you this days in advance if it had all the data days in advance.

That is what G+ WAS SUPPOSED to be. It had nothing to do (in concept) with FP+. It was a revolution, not an evolution.

Making it actually do all those things however is a bigger bite than I think even Disney is capable of.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

Very well said.

Something else I think is being overlooked amidst the frustration over G+ is that FP+ optimization expertise on DIS did not spring up overnight, it grew over a period of time. It wasn't something that could be mastered with an hour of study. Back in August 2019 I came here and read up on FP+ but didn't really get all the 60+X strategies necessary to get the headliners. And I suspect it took more than 1 WDW trip to master it. I think the same is true of G+. Over time, folks will develop greater ability to optimize their G+ day and work around some of its limitations. Things like when it pays to refresh and for what rides. Or knowing when you can afford to sleep in a bit and book at 8:30AM rather than 7. Knowing when an early return time prior to Park Open+2 hrs pays dividends. And ultimately when it pays to buy G+ and when it doesn't.

Also remember that G has a rather large complex computer behind it. That computer has some degree of AI. Every day it's gathering more and more data which allows is to predict more accurately. Prediction is all about accurate data.

The longer G is "alive", the better it's going to get. In a year, G will hopefully be a lot better at it's job.

 

[Grim Grinning Ghostie]

I admit to being on the record as saying that's unfair to people who are handicapped or have small children or elderly grandparents with them.

That's true. I remember back in the day my parents used to use Child Swap to ride the thrill rides we were too young/too short/etc. to enjoy. From what I remember, Disney has since gutted that, as well.

I don't know what the middle ground would be to allow everyone to fully enjoy the parks, but G+ definitely isn't it.

 

[Jennasis]

Well, so lets be clear on what G+ was. It was never meant to 'fix' FP+ - that's true. CONCEPTUALLY G+ was designed to be a helper application that planned your entire day for you. It was meant to go above rides and give you a cohesive day planning tool - everything from transportation to maps of the park to where to eat to what rides. The concept was to take what you wanted to do and plan the MOST EFFECTIVE route for you to do those things and MAXIMIZE the things you could do by taking into account things like minimal walking distance and anticipated crowds. In addition, using technology, Disney should be able to 'guide' people to spread the crowd evenly across the park so the park is used more consistently and avoid log jams. As a bonus, G+ would be able to suggest activities that many people didn't even know existed.

There are a few problems with the concept. The first is free will. People will never do everything an app tells them. In order for it to work correctly, the majority of the crowd would have to use it and NOT use it to ride hop, but actually use it as intended - go where it tells you to go, not where the latest ride has a brief opening. People are NEVER going to do that.

Also, the technology is not quite there yet. In theory, it's a math problem. Given enough data and enough computing power, G+ should be able to plan everyone's day perfectly so that if everyone followed what it said and went where it told them and all the rides worked all the time and the restaurants served a predictable amount of people then everyone would be able to do what G+ told them they could do at the beginning of the day. Starting the day at a predictable time and preplanned prior, G+ should be able to tell you everything that you wanted and what you would not be able to do. Ideally it would tell you this days in advance if it had all the data days in advance.

That is what G+ WAS SUPPOSED to be. It had nothing to do (in concept) with FP+. It was a revolution, not an evolution.

Making it actually do all those things however is a bigger bite than I think even Disney is capable of.

That's what GENIE was supposed to do (and still fails at). GENIE+ is just the line skipping part of the application.

 

[Kingoglow]

Every system benefits one group of people over the other.

We barely utilized the OG FP. Too much running around with small kids or a stroller. I feel it wasn’t the best for those with small children or those who couldn’t maneuver the park like a mad man. If you had someone in your group who was good with keeping track of when you can pull the next FP, separating from the group and running around to all these rides you benefited.

I loved FP+. It benefited someone like me. A planner that stays onsite, takes 9-10 day trips and books almost a year out. On a 10 day ticket I was guaranteed 30 rides! We had days we planned on only doing WS but would pop in somewhere to do our 3 rides. It was amazing.

G+ Is a virtual version of the OG FP. It benefits those who are good with technology and those with the fastest fingers and phones. I planned on upgrading my iPhone soon but I’m going to wait until closer to our trip. Newer phone and I don’t use Disney WiFi. I hope it benefits me somehow.

This is a good account of all the systems.

That old FP system worked against everyone with mobility or ambulatory conditions, and those with strollers. If you take a look of the make up of the people in the parks at Disney World, you can see why that system had to go.

 

[DisneyAuntie12]

I think it’s difficult to say that G+ was or wasn’t meant to address complaints about FP+ without good data on how many people were complaining about it. You can find groups of people complaining about literally anything online. Certainly not all of those complaints get addressed. You can’t please all of the people all of the time, as the saying goes. I think you’d need customer feedback data to see if this was actually a major issue or not.

 

[mickeyluv'r]

I will still go for them and travel the way I choose: Deluxe on site hotels and half-days in the parks...it is my vacation after all.

Absolutely.

That's why I tried to preface my post by saying, "for me" But I understand in a typed forum post tone is very hard to convey. I wasn't trying to be dismissive. I used to think nothing of half-park days.

Actually, more than that. Many times extending my trip = getting a free WDW day! I'll explain:

Initially, I planned to fly to WDW on a Friday (maybe the 15th), and Friday AM airfare was $155 per person (to fly one-way that day).

Then I looked at Thursday (the 14th), and PM airfare for that day was only $70.

Back then, the cost of Pop was about $99.

So flying on the 15th = $155 each - so $310 for 2 people.

Flying on the 14th was $70 each. So flying on the 14th for 2 people PLUS getting a room at Pop only cost $140+$99 = $239.
And for a long time, adding a day onto your park ticket was only $3-4. So $239+8 = $247.

So that leaves about $70 for food (above what we'd pay to eat at home).

Most of the time, it was more like an extra half day, not a full day, just based on which flight was cheapest.

Also, for me, as long as I have been going to WDW, I've always split my FL time between WDW and non-WDW, and it feels normal to me. I enjoy changing hotels part-way through the trip. For one thing, it is an easy way to cut costs.

I can stay at a very nice Marriott for $200-ish, while some WDW deluxe hotels are $1000+. So like, on the last night, we swap hotels, have a swim day/better food, and still save over $600!

 

[mickeyluv'r]

It's too easy for people to get in a virtual line that they may never actually use - but they get in "in case they are there". I would LOVE to see actual data on how many people use their ride reservations. I know there is a certain percentage of "no shows".

Give me the physically tickets. I am okay with saving paper... but make you go to a machine at the ride and tag in. Although I admit to being on the record as saying that's unfair to people who are handicapped or have small children or elderly grandparents with them.

I don't know that is really true, I STILL have a collection of old paper FP, and we regularly gave them away to strangers back in the day. Mind, the ones we kept were times we rode the attraction, it was just that when we got there the ride was walk-on, so the passes were of no value/benefit. But we have no idea if those people used the passes.

With a group, we used to just take turns, and send one person with everyone's ticket, while everyone else did something like ordering food or using the restroom.

Whereas, with electronic FP+, if ever we couldn't use a pass, you could modify it with just a few clicks. So I think it was - more or less- much easier to give them away. it just took the form of an electronic swap.

Where I think FP- was a plus was that you could easily choose your park on the fly. We often chose our first day park based simply on which bus arrived first. I suppose one could sorta do that now, but you have to cancel/rebook your park pass by 7am or skip Genie+.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

I think it’s difficult to say that G+ was or wasn’t meant to address complaints about FP+ without good data on how many people were complaining about it. You can find groups of people complaining about literally anything online. Certainly not all of those complaints get addressed. You can’t please all of the people all of the time, as the saying goes. I think you’d need customer feedback data to see if this was actually a major issue or not.

Fair enough, and Disney is never going to release that kind of information, so we will never know with 100% certainty.

But we can say that empirical evidence is that it was a widespread problem that people were not able to get their FP+ selections at either 30 or 60 days out, that it had been complained about extensively both on social media (which pre-pandemic during the development of Genie was being monitored by Disney and in tweets directed to Disney) and directly to Disney (if even a small percentage of people who said they were going to complain followed through, then Disney received a lot of complaints) and that it was a question of which Disney was focused on during the development of Genie (based on survey's which were taken at the parks). We also know that Disney spent a lot of time cracking down on various loopholes to FP+.

On top of that, as a manager for software developers, if I were given the task of developing Genie - besides shooting myself the next day - I would have gone online and looked at the current issues people were experiencing and that one was hard to miss.

So while I agree with your premise that we can not say with any 100% certainly, I think we can say that it's highly, highly probable. Which in science is about all you can ever say.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

I don't know that is really true, I STILL have a collection of old paper FP, and we regularly gave them away to strangers back in the day. Mind, the ones we kept were times we rode the attraction, it was just that when we got there the ride was walk-on, so the passes were of no value/benefit. But we have no idea if those people used the passes.

With a group, we used to just take turns, and send one person with everyone's ticket, while everyone else did something like ordering food or using the restroom.

Whereas, with electronic FP+, if ever we couldn't use a pass, you could modify it with just a few clicks. So I think it was - more or less- much easier to give them away. it just took the form of an electronic swap.

Where I think FP- was a plus was that you could easily choose your park on the fly. We often chose our first day park based simply on which bus arrived first. I suppose one could sorta do that now, but you have to cancel/rebook your park pass by 7am or skip Genie+.

I'll give you that. I was thinking more using myself as an example. I would book 3 FP+ at EPCOT. One was usually Soarin' or TT and the other 2 were essentially "throw away". I likely was not going to use them. I never really went in and modified them. If I was near the ride when the time came up, I used it. If not, <shrug>. But I made them because.... I mean... why not?

Compare that to FP-, I would never have gone out of my way to get a paper ticket at most of those rides. Either I would ride it, or I would not.

But I also see what you are saying.

Granted, it's less of an issue for E Ticket attractions. No one skipped a TT if they could help it.