Can Disney admit that FP+ and MDE are a fail?

[redrosesix]

This isn't an entirely fair anaolgy. Dis members tend to be people who, over the past 20+ years have spend way more money at WDW than an average guest, and who are likely going to spend more money at WDW over the next 20 years than an average guest. So rather than being a "neighborhood", they more closely follow the description of the "target audience". If I own a restaurant, I am going to care more about the opinions of my "regulars" than I am of the person who was just passsing through and will never visit me again. Dis'ers are Disney regulars, so their opinions might be different (such as, a higher percentage of "commandos") than an average guest, but I don't think that Dis'er's opinions vary greatly from other frequent WDW regulars who don't bother to post on boards. For every member here, there are hundreds of other WDW regulars and DVC owners who view things much the same way, only they don't post about it. Yes, the views here will not map over to first time guests. But they do map over to the views of people who visit annually or close to it. But this is neither here nor there.


Thanks. That all makes sense. And it really helps that you put it into perspective by explaining your prior usage of FP-.

I think this is right. And the fact is, no matter how much we have complained about FP+ or anything else, we might still go or we would at least be willing to go again if something was changed.

Let's all put on our bean counter hats. If Disney were your company, who would you market to more? Family A) "My family is done with WDW" who goes 1+ per year but stays off site, doesn't buy DDP or souvenirs and has figured out how to maximize rides at the least cost or Family B) "Once or twice in a lifetime" who stays on-site, spends lots of money and are happy that they get to ride the headliners once.

I would do everything I could to attract Family B since they would drive higher profits. I would also hope that making Family B happy would increase the word of mouth marketing and get other Family B types to come to WDW.

Bottom line, the number of Family B types is much larger than the Family A types and are much more profitable to Disney. Of course Disney is going to cater to that segment.

Plus, Family A is a captive audience. They are coming back for a reason. But if they choose to go elsewhere, no big deal since I don't make much money from them. AND it frees up space/ride capacity for me to attract more Family B types.

I think this is what Bob Iger thinks, but I also don't think it's true. If things go wrong and line waits increase a lot of Family Bs will just be turned off and go elsewhere -- there are plenty of places in Canada that compete with Disney for family B's money, and I'm sure many more in the US. Those Family Bs may be lost forever -- you know the type, the ones who won't listen about how great Disney is because of what they have heard. There is no way that family will gamble their money and limited vacation time on an unknown, or something they already consider less than ideal.

Same as with the Dis members, Disney can screw up and we'll still (mostly) keep going. Yes, we will complain but we know that there have been changes before and like so many have said they will have to fix this. The family As are the ones they need to get in the seats -- the ones for whom D23 was created. Like the seasonals in a campground (by the way, I'm a seasonal and the former owners had to sell the campground because they lost too many of us).

Then there are the bread and butter -- the AP holders who will be there in the parks no matter what happens outside of Orlando. Without them the parks would completely fail. They can cut back on staff and hours, "refurb" rides etc but as long as the AP holders keep coming the parks can at least stay open.

I feel like some of the former CEOs got this, especially the Disneys -- pretty sure Bob Iger doesn't. How does this relate to FP+? No matter what anyone says now, the system we have is the one they intended. No company puts a new system in place specifically designed to tick off its customers and possibly lose future revenue. They seriously thought this would work ie. they could get away with forcing people onto less popular rides in order to cut down on wait times for popular rides, because they think it's only the family B's that they need to keep their parks going.

 

[JimmyV]

Repeating the same complaints over and over and over on a message board is not going to accomplish anything.

As much as I detest the phrase, I'm afraid we will just have to "agree to disagree" about the impact of social media on corporate decision making. There are concrete examples of cruise lines changing policies due to customer reaction on Cruise Critic. The cruise lines even admit that their changes have resulted from complaints voiced on CC and other social media outlets. I really don't think the Dis Board is any different. Pete admits as much in the most recent Podcast where he says in no uncertain terms that Dsney is reading these boards. A complaint is a complaint. But my complaint to Disney would be read by one person (and according to one poster, will be thrown in the trash). My complaint here will be read by tens of thousands, some of whom might say......"Hmmm. Maybe there something to that" and might act on it. (Others might say....."That guy's an idiot." I am prepared for either. )

 

[momof2n2]

Let's all put on our bean counter hats. If Disney were your company, who would you market to more? Family A) "My family is done with WDW" who goes 1+ per year but stays off site, doesn't buy DDP or souvenirs and has figured out how to maximize rides at the least cost or Family B) "Once or twice in a lifetime" who stays on-site, spends lots of money and are happy that they get to ride the headliners once.

I would do everything I could to attract Family B since they would drive higher profits. I would also hope that making Family B happy would increase the word of mouth marketing and get other Family B types to come to WDW.

Bottom line, the number of Family B types is much larger than the Family A types and are much more profitable to Disney. Of course Disney is going to cater to that segment.

Plus, Family A is a captive audience. They are coming back for a reason. But if they choose to go elsewhere, no big deal since I don't make much money from them. AND it frees up space/ride capacity for me to attract more Family B types.

Hmmm - I think there is more to this than you suggest. How about a Family A who helps many, many Family B types who think they can "never afford" WDW realize it is possible?

Although my knowledge pales in comparison to many on this board I am regularly identified as a Disney Expert by friends in our social circles. And already I have strongly discouraged two would be Family Bs from doing WDW this year. I have encouraged both of them to consider other options while this whole FP junk is ironed out.

And you'd be surprised just how much that Family A spends. When you pay out of pocket for tickets and go from RD to closing you spend a lot on food, drinks and souvenirs.

 

[TreyQ3]

You set this up as a binary option, but it isn't. One does not have to choose to market more to one family or the other. One can, and should, market to both equally. I would have a customer service rep on the phone with Family A in a heartbeat asking them why they are dissatisfied and what I could do to change that. I would also see what I could do to change their mind to get them to stay on site, if not always, then at least once in a while.

And I would market to Family B and try to convince them that WDW is an affordable vacation option that can be done far more frequently than once or twice in a lifetime. My marketing strategies would differ as between the two families, but I would always market to both and would never choose on or the other.

Fair point. But if your goal is to make Family B more happy, even at the expense of Family A, then you implement FP+ and roll the dice that Family A will keep coming back. Is FP+ enough to stop Family A from coming. Disney is betting no.

 

[john398]

No I haven't where is it at? Thanks

Here sorry for delay

 

[jade1]

Well, I guess the reason I keep reading the boards is I am waiting for the added "minutes and texts."

For me that will be when I can once again have two FP for TSMM and two for RnRC on the same day.

Makes sense for your style.

This system can get there IMO-but you may need to either stay onsite/mod/deluxe who knows?

Or it may be a DVC purchase or add on.

Maybe a FP+ purchase itself.

They could tweak seasons? Sept offers more like free dining etc?

New headliners and attraction expansion will lead to more availability as well.

But yea mom2rtk's cell phone example would mean we would not have cell phones any more, and look how that turned out-but Disney has to deliver as well, unless 3 turns out to be enough for the general population.

 

[JimmyV]

Fair point. But if your goal is to make Family B more happy, even at the expense of Family A, then you implement FP+ and roll the dice that Family A will keep coming back. Is FP+ enough to stop Family A from coming. Disney is betting no.

The hammer has hit the nail. This boils down to a change that will have the known effect of ticking off (<--insert more common expression) many frequent guests and park commandos while bringing a smile to the faces of many "Family Bs". Huge risk. But I think the takeaway from the opinions on this board and elsewhere, is that a few implementable changes can bring the commandos back into the tent without losing any of the "Family Bs". So while the OP's use of the term "fail" might not fit perfectly, there does seem to be room in this debate for the possibility that Disney has let down many of its most ardent fans with a system that could be easily changed to more closely align with their wants and needs, all the while still resulting in satisfaction to Family B. So asked another way: "Will Disney ever admit that it short-sightedly implemented a system that many long-time supporters destest?" The answer will be revealed with future changes. If they come, that is all but an affirmative answer to the revised question, even if Disney never makes mention of the reasons behind the change. (Which it won't).

 

[Minnesota!]

I loved New Coke.
Not willing to give FP+ a try.

I wish they'd use the technology to have the bands work like old FP. No pre-booking. Just walk to the ride, look at the time, tap if you want the FP. Sure, eliminate paper, use your new technology, but work it the old way.

But I'm not holding my breath.

This is EXACTLY what I proposed. The booking months in advance, and 3 only, at that (this is coming from someone who MAYBE used 1 - 2 a day, a few times out of a week long trip...but I know there are FP commandos who, with this "technology" have had their vacations reduced to "nothing".). Why can't I ride Soarin 6 times a day on FP if that is how I want to vacation? I don't like that WDW is LIMITING a guest to how they can vacation. Sure, we can stand in the standby line - and usually do - but, why take away a guest's ability to choose how they want to vacation?

It's all very 1984...no matter how cutting edge the technology is.

 

[TreyQ3]

Then there are the bread and butter -- the AP holders who will be there in the parks no matter what happens outside of Orlando. Without them the parks would completely fail. They can cut back on staff and hours, "refurb" rides etc but as long as the AP holders keep coming the parks can at least stay open.

I'm not sure that is correct. If Disney placed a high value on AP holders, then they would be one of the first groups to move to FP+.

I believe (without any facts to back this up) the local AP holders are not a profitable group. I would think the majority are day trippers who don't need hotels and don't spend much. I think the parks are fully open for the "Once in a Lifetime" group and the AP holders get in based on marginal costing. Whatever they make from the AP holders is gravy since the operating costs are being paid by the "Once in a Lifetime" group.

I would not put the out of state AP holders in the same group. And I don't think they makeup a large percentage.

 

[flicx]

Here sorry for delay

Thanks!

 

[wisblue]

As much as I detest the phrase, I'm afraid we will just have to "agree to disagree" about the impact of social media on corporate decision making. There are concrete examples of cruise lines changing policies due to customer reaction on Cruise Critic. The cruise lines even admit that their changes have resulted from complaints voiced on CC and other social media outlets. I really don't think the Dis Board is any different. Pete admits as much in the most recent Podcast where he says in no uncertain terms that Dsney is reading these boards. A complaint is a complaint. But my complaint to Disney would be read by one person (and according to one poster, will be thrown in the trash). My complaint here will be read by tens of thousands, some of whom might say......"Hmmm. Maybe there something to that" and might act on it. (Others might say....."That guy's an idiot." I am prepared for either. )

I think you missed my point.

When I talk about making the same complaint over and over and over on a message board, I am talking about the same person making the same complaint literally dozens of times a week.

I have no doubt that companies pay attention to social media. But the employees who do the monitoring can also see when one person is "voting' multiple times.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

The hammer has hit the nail. This boils down to a change that will have the known effect of ticking off (<--insert more common expression) many frequent guests and park commandos while bringing a smile to the faces of many "Family Bs". Huge risk. But I think the takeaway from the opinions on this board and elsewhere, is that a few implementable changes can bring the commandos back into the tent without losing any of the "Family Bs". So while the OP's use of the term "fail" might not fit perfectly, there does seem to be room in this debate for the possibility that Disney has let down many of its most ardent fans with a system that could be easily changed to more closely align with their wants and needs, all the while still resulting in satisfaction to Family B. So asked another way: "Will Disney ever admit that it short-sightedly implemented a system that many long-time supporters destest?" The answer will be revealed with future changes. If they come, that is all but an affirmative answer to the revised question, even if Disney never makes mention of the reasons behind the change. (Which it won't).

I agree with your premise, but we don't know what we don't know. I believe that Disney will listen to complaints, but I do not believe that they will even try to correct them all. Some of the "fixes" might impact the viability of the entire system. Those will never be considered. We do not know what they are.

For instance, 5 FP+/day seems reasonable with no more knowledge than we currently have. Disney know exactly how many FPs they can allow on a given day. 5 may not be possible while allowing all guests access to their favorite rides. Tiering might be absolutely necessary for this to work in the parks with fewer ride options.

I can see a scenario in which more FP+ are allowed during value seasons. This would draw even more people to the parks during value season, and fewer patron means that the limit can be higher.

Also, we don't know if they are setting up a "pay for more FP+" scenario. If they are, 3 FP+/day is probably their high point for free to allow enough FP+ remaining for those willing to pay a premium.

Again - we do not know what we do not know. For now it is safe to say that this is not a failure as park attendance has increased since its implementation. Change will come, but we can only guess what it will look like.

 

[mom2rtk]

I can agree. And just think if everyone considered cell phones a fail at first.

Like you say, the cell phone industry didn't really take off immediately, but has been one of the most successful endeavors in history.

And how did the cell phone industry improve? Adding more coverage and better phones.

So now WDW has laid down the infrastructure and can begin adding the minutes and texts...I mean headliners and attractions.

I can agree with all of that. I really don't think Disney would let this flounder for long if it doesn't take off.

But when cell phones came out, we all still had our landlines. When Disney covered the fastpass machines, they yanked out our landlines.

 

[redrosesix]

I'm not sure that is correct. If Disney placed a high value on AP holders, then they would be one of the first groups to move to FP+.

I believe (without any facts to back this up) the local AP holders are not a profitable group. I would think the majority are day trippers who don't need hotels and don't spend much. I think the parks are fully open for the "Once in a Lifetime" group and the AP holders get in based on marginal costing. Whatever they make from the AP holders is gravy since the operating costs are being paid by the "Once in a Lifetime" group.

I would not put the out of state AP holders in the same group. And I don't think they makeup a large percentage.

I didn't say Disney valued the AP holders -- I said they should value AP holders. Everyone forgets what it was like after 9/11 -- but who doesn't want to forget that -- and here we are again wondering if we can pack toothpaste in our luggage this wknd.

It's that yearly renewal fee that they can almost count on. They get it whether those pass holders come to the park or not ie. AP money helps pay the operating costs just to keep the park open. They're like a free marketing campaign for the parks and sometimes they bring their friends.

 

[redrosesix]

I agree with your premise, but we don't know what we don't know. I believe that Disney will listen to complaints, but I do not believe that they will even try to correct them all. Some of the "fixes" might impact the viability of the entire system. Those will never be considered. We do not know what they are.

For instance, 5 FP+/day seems reasonable with no more knowledge than we currently have. Disney know exactly how many FPs they can allow on a given day. 5 may not be possible while allowing all guests access to their favorite rides. Tiering might be absolutely necessary for this to work in the parks with fewer ride options.

I can see a scenario in which more FP+ are allowed during value seasons. This would draw even more people to the parks during value season, and fewer patron means that the limit can be higher.

Also, we don't know if they are setting up a "pay for more FP+" scenario. If they are, 3 FP+/day is probably their high point for free to allow enough FP+ remaining for those willing to pay a premium.

Again - we do not know what we do not know. For now it is safe to say that this is not a failure as park attendance has increased since its implementation. Change will come, but we can only guess what it will look like.

I don't think so -- they said attendance has been flat for the year but revenues have increased since ticket prices were increased. This actually surprised me since there are a lot of reports about how most North Americans are traveling again.

 

[TreyQ3]

The hammer has hit the nail. This boils down to a change that will have the known effect of ticking off (<--insert more common expression) many frequent guests and park commandos while bringing a smile to the faces of many "Family Bs". Huge risk. But I think the takeaway from the opinions on this board and elsewhere, is that a few implementable changes can bring the commandos back into the tent without losing any of the "Family Bs". So while the OP's use of the term "fail" might not fit perfectly, there does seem to be room in this debate for the possibility that Disney has let down many of its most ardent fans with a system that could be easily changed to more closely align with their wants and needs, all the while still resulting in satisfaction to Family B. So asked another way: "Will Disney ever admit that it short-sightedly implemented a system that many long-time supporters destest?" The answer will be revealed with future changes. If they come, that is all but an affirmative answer to the revised question, even if Disney never makes mention of the reasons behind the change. (Which it won't).

Your premise is that Disney values both types equally and there are equal numbers of both groups. I think the number of Family A types is very small. But they are very vocal!

What if there are 100K Family B types for every Family A and Disney makes $3K per trip more from Family B? I think Disney is willing to hold their nose and look the other way, laughing all the way to the bank.

If the number of FP+ was the biggest complaint from the Family B types, then I would bet a change would be made. I believe the complaining from the Family A types will not change anything.

 

[MrInfinity]

I can agree with all of that. I really don't think Disney would let this flounder for long if it doesn't take off.

It's not floundering. At all. Unless you're referring to the staged rollout, which you're not. You're suggesting it's not being successful. It is. Immensely.

But when cell phones came out, we all still had our landlines. When Disney covered the fastpass machines, they yanked out our landlines.

You still have standby lines. You still have rope drop. You still have 3 guaranteed rides at the busiest time of the parks without having to run for fastpass tickets. That's pretty cool. Look at the positives. Your "landline" is still there.

 

[JimmyV]

I agree with your premise, but we don't know what we don't know. I believe that Disney will listen to complaints, but I do not believe that they will even try to correct them all. Some of the "fixes" might impact the viability of the entire system. Those will never be considered. We do not know what they are.

Excellent point. However, what I am suggesting is that Disney will want to move this away from being binary where it has to tick off "A" in order to please "B". I think we can assume that their goal was to bring "B" into the fold while not losing "A". The goal could not have been to create a civil war where it attracts lots of "Bs" knowing that it will be losing lots of "As". So the smart thing to do would be to go back to the drawing board and figure out which of the features demanded by the "As" can actually be implemented while doing the least amount of damage to the viability of the system. One will always hear: "But we can't. It would ruin the system that we designed." And smart companies will reply: "I don't believe in "can't". Figure it out!" I agree that certain things that the "As" are demanding may collapse the viability. Like tiering. Not sure that can go away. But adding one simple change, such as, "3 FP+ bookable in advance and 2 more upon arrival in the park, to be used at any park, subject to availability" would quiet a lot of critics, and Disney can always fall back on the "subject to availability" to ensure that the system remains viable, since they will set the availiability parameters.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

I didn't say Disney valued the AP holders -- I said they should value AP holders. Everyone forgets what it was like after 9/11 -- but who doesn't want to forget that -- and here we are again wondering if we can pack toothpaste in our luggage this wknd.

It's that yearly renewal fee that they can almost count on. They get it whether those pass holders come to the park or not ie. AP money helps pay the operating costs just to keep the park open. They're like a free marketing campaign for the parks and sometimes they bring their friends.

I think that you have that backwards. The AP itself is the reward for frequent guests, but Disney really would prefer not to sell them at all. The AP holder goes to the park a lot more than any other guest type, and spends less/day than any other guest type.

 

[JimmyV]

Your premise is that Disney values both types equally and there are equal numbers of both groups. I think the number of Family A types is very small. But they are very vocal!

What if there are 100K Family B types for every Family A and Disney makes $3K per trip more from Family B? I think Disney is willing to hold their nose and look the other way, laughing all the way to the bank.

If the number of FP+ was the biggest complaint from the Family B types, then I would bet a change would be made. I believe the complaining from the Family A types will not change anything.

Neither of us is privvy to the metrics. All we can do is guess and predict. My guess/prediction is that the number of FP+ will change. It will increase. And it will increase due to complaints. From whom, it will never be known. But call a Disney Customer Service Rep right now and complain about the number "3" and you will be told: "We are aware that many of our guests are disappointed with that number and we are looking into it." Again, only a guess, but I imagine that the "we are aware that many of our guests" part is a reference to complaints from many more "As" than "Bs". Either way, this issue has already bubbled up to "script level" for customer service reps.