DEBATE:Don't DVC Members Deserve the New Elite Fastpasses?

[PKS44]

I agree completely with everything said by DisneyKidds... and pretty much most of what matt said...and Snacky of course....my problem was with the word DESERVE and the misdefinition of FAIRNESS being passed around----the key is that Disney changes things at their peril--maybe they think on balance it will make them more money and maybe they are wrong- I think it would be a big mistake to alter the system as others are saying...but take a look at this website- http://vondrake.com/news/destination_disney.php

This has been touched on here but never have I seen so much detail...the key for this discussion is the handheld Fastpass acquiring capabilities..no need to traverse from Space to Splash to get a Fastpass- just punch it up...this to me seems a reasonable way for Disney to market their packages, not alter the FP logic and fairness too much and the devices would be available to anyone who wants to rent one...this seems more believable as a possible change to the system at WDW..remember that WDW is so much bigger than Disneyland that a few extra FP's at DL hotels is nothing compared to what such a change would do with 20,000 rooms at WDW...



Paul

 

[raidermatt]

Raidermatt is very wise.

Hey, this this the first time in my life "wise" was used to describe me without another word attatched to it! Thanks!

(Hint... the other word starts with an "A" and is similar to a donkey! I actually get this one a lot, though I can't for the life of me figure out why... )

 

[raidermatt]

So what you're saying is that you should still be able to save the money on your vacation and be able to buy into the Ultimate Fastpass privlege. When everybody else won't be able to save that money. They'd have to spend substantially more.

How much I save or don't save on my vacation has absolutely nothing to do with it. Neither does the word "should". Its not about what I "should" get. That is a legal question, and is not an issue here.

No, this is instead about what is in Disney's best interests to do. That's the only basis for my argument.

Legally speaking, DVC members aren't even guaranteed that the parks will EXIST in the future. Disney could blow them up tomorrow, but keep the DVC units open and not refund a penny to anyone.

However, regardless of what the legal obligations are, the EXPECTATION is that the parks will be there, and that DVC members will have the same access to anything in the parks that other on-site guests have access to. That includes FastPass, Early Entry, whatever. Limiting that access in anyway results in guest expectations not being met, and just like with anything else, that is a problem for DISNEY. Again, it doesn't matter whether anyone other than those guests agree with that expectation or not. As a service-oriented company, Disney must either MEET that expectation, or find a way to "manage" that expectation. If not, they will suffer financial consequences in some way, shape or form.

 

[SnackyStacky]

I said it once, and I'll say it again.

I'm fighting a losing battle here.

No, this is instead about what is in Disney's best interests to do. That's the only basis for my argument.

Would it be in Disney's best interest to offer it to the DVC member at an additional charge? Yes, it would be in DISNEY'S best interest (speaking in a very bottom line matter). OBVIOUSLY it would because they'd be making more money.

Would it be in the best interest of the guest base to offer it to the DVC member at an additional charge? Not in the least.

Two completely different discussions, and it wasn't clarified in the subject line which one we were debating. I was debating whether or not it would be in the guest's best interest.

And then taking it from there, since we're discussing whether or not it's in Disney's best interest:

Is it in Disney's best financial interest in the long term to offer this to DVC members? I would have to say no. In the short term, yes, it's in Disney's best financial interest. It generates profits immediately. BUT, if you alienate enough people by allowing one group to bypass the rules, everyone else feels cheated, and that detracts from your guest base yet again.

I think it's being forgotten that the DVC are NOT Disney's ONLY loyal guest base. There are thousands if not MILLIONS of others who are not, and aren't gonna be too happy that DVC members don't have to do what everybody else has to do to get the pass.

PKS, I thinkm the iPaq system is a very reasonable way to do things. Expensive, and a logistical nightmare, but reasonable.

 

[raidermatt]

When I say "Disneys' best interest", I am referring to long-term. I usually say so, but did not this time. My apologies.

Would it be in Disney's best interest to offer it to the DVC member at an additional charge? Yes, it would be in DISNEY'S best interest (speaking in a very bottom line matter). OBVIOUSLY it would because they'd be making more money.

Maybe it would when looking at the short-term bottom line, but that isn't what I was talking about. Except in extraordinary circumstances, the long-term is what Disney should always be looking at.

Would it be in the best interest of the guest base to offer it to the DVC member at an additional charge? Not in the least.

Well of course not. Premium FastPasses (PFPs) are not in the best interest of ANY guest that does not get the option of obtaining them. DVC or not, it hurts them.

I was debating whether or not it would be in the guest's best interest.

If that's the case, there really isn't much to debate. If a guest is in the population that has the option to obtatin the PFP's, and they think its a good value, then its in their best interests. For all other guests, its damaging to their interests.

That's the whole point of the argument about offering them AT ALL. In order for them to be a benefit to one guest, it must be to the detriment of another.

Is it in Disney's best financial interest in the long term to offer this to DVC members? I would have to say no.

Assuming its going to be offered, then I still couldn't disagree with you more.

BUT, if you alienate enough people by allowing one group to bypass the rules, everyone else feels cheated, and that detracts from your guest base yet again.

You're making excellent arguments for not offering PFPs at all, but this has nothing to do with which groups it is offered to. No matter who PFPs are offered to, everyone else is going to feel cheated. The question for this thread is if you are going to accept that result, who are you going to alienate?

I think it's being forgotten that the DVC are NOT Disney's ONLY loyal guest base.

Not at all. I've even said as much. DVC is actually a VERY SMALL percentage of WDW's guests, and there are certainly some others who are just as loyal as DVC'ers. However, there is no other group that has "put their money where their mouth is", like DVC members have.

There are thousands if not MILLIONS of others who are not, and aren't gonna be too happy that DVC members don't have to do what everybody else has to do to get the pass.

That's just simply not true, and I don't know how else to say it.

What is it that these other millions have to do? Only book their package through a particular channel. They aren't even paying for the PFPs. There is just no way that these folks are going to get p'd off that DVCers were allowed to PAY for something that everyone else can have for FREE. For those that do find out and care enough to ask, they will most certainly understand when they find out DVC'ers commit over $10,000 up front, plus pay annual dues, and then have to pay $XX per day for PFPs.

If PFPs happen in the manner stated, the ONLY groups that do not have a fair chance to get them are those that have pre-paid through another channel. That includes DVC'ers who have pre-paid for their accomodations, and AP holders who have pre-paid for their park tickets.

Excluding ANY of your pre-paid guests from even having the chance to buy into a program like this goes against everything a service oriented company is supposed to be about.

 

[doubletrouble_vb]

This thread is getting into a terrible uproar over imaginary possibilities.

Let me first state that I own DVC, I also own Disney shares.

Next let me state that my opinion is that I purchased a b****in', a** kickin' accomodation. I did not purchase the ability to get access to any and everything Disney might offer in the future. If Disney chooses to risk that I might stay on site and go to universal instead...so be it. It isn't the end of the world, it isn't horrific. If I don't like something I will vote with my feet. In fact I'm sure some Beach Club devotees voted with their feet when BCV was built. That's life. Disney impinged on a certain exclusivity YC/BC had when they built BCV.

As a shareholder I expect Disney do maximize my dividends and share price over the long-term. If that means giving a small subset of people a benefit I can't get using my points for accomodations so be it. Now if Disney is so stupid as to offend the 99.95% of people who don't read this board who also go to Disney...that I would have a problem with...and with an intelligent implementation I don't see that that would be the case.

And....If they put in some type of special fastpass program I don't see the limiting factor being WDTC bookings...I think they used that in the case of DL because it probably represented a small population at DISNEYLAND. They would have to use a different restriction at Disneyworld.

 

[raidermatt]

This thread is getting into a terrible uproar over imaginary possibilities.

Hypothetical is probably a better choice of words than imaginary, and its hardly an uproar, at least by this board's standards...

Next let me state that my opinion is that I purchased a b****in', a** kickin' accomodation. I did not purchase the ability to get access to any and everything Disney might offer in the future.

Nobody has disagreed with this statement. DVC'ers know what they purchased. Nonetheless, the majority still EXPECT to at least have equal access/privileges when it comes to the parks. Whether or not you or I share that expectation, or think its justified is irrelevant. What is relevant is that it exists.

If Disney chooses to risk that I might stay on site and go to universal instead...so be it. It isn't the end of the world, it isn't horrific.

Who ever said its the end of the world? It would just be a bad business decision on Disney's part if their actions result in more of their DVC members spending time at Universal.

If I don't like something I will vote with my feet.

So will everybody else. But as a business, Disney needs to consider how many will vote by going elsewhere, using more, points for other venues, or even selling their interests.

In fact I'm sure some Beach Club devotees voted with their feet when BCV was built. That's life. Disney impinged on a certain exclusivity YC/BC had when they built BCV.

That's life? A business must always consider the consequences of its actions. Telling those who aren't happy that "stuff happens" isn't exactly a customer friendly attitude.

Regardless, your example is very different than the PFP situation. DVC dues pay for things like housekeeping and the front desk, so that other BC guests aren't even impacted. The only impact is a relatively minor increase in pool useage. But since pool hopping to Stormalong Bay was also discontinued for other DVC guests, BC guests actually benefitted from the BCV's being built.

As a shareholder I expect Disney do maximize my dividends and share price over the long-term.

Since Disney still calls themselves a growth company, I'm much more concerned with price than dividends, but regardless, current management's philosophies have resulted in a 10+ year stagnation in Disney's stock. That alone is a very good reason to question decisions that are being made using that same philosophy...

 

[tinybubbles]

I don't get it. DVC members have already shown that they have no sense of value, as they have paid way too much for a timeshare. So why should Disney go to any trouble for them at all? They're already hooked into visiting the parks regularly anyway.

Anybody on-the-ball enough to be swayed by special perks at the parks isn't too likely to fall for the DVC thing anyway.

 

[raidermatt]

I don't get it. DVC members have already shown that they have no sense of value, as they have paid way too much for a timeshare.

They are saving money versus paying for deluxe accomodations at WDW. If they go to WDW anyway, and stay in deluxe accomodations anyway, why is it not a good value to purchase DVC and stay in those accomodations for less money?

So why should Disney go to any trouble for them at all? They're already hooked into visiting the parks regularly anyway.

Welcome to the boards, Mr. Eisner...

 

[ohanafamily]

Hello All,

I (chomp [squawk] chomp chomp) want to first (chomp chomp) apologize for my (chomp) previous post (gulp…OK, I swallowed the crow). I was trying for a sarcastic retort but was obviously hurried. I was not, and did not mean to sound as upset as it generally seems that everyone thought I was. I was also not meaning to start a flame war. I think that this was my first edited post, Will I be forgiven? I hope so.

I think Matt is saying pretty much everything that I was trying to say, but I want to clarify a few of my statements that just didn’t come out right.

I was actually trying to comment that since this topic moved from the DVC board to the Rumors Board, it seems a lot more judgmental. Paul and Dan, I did not mean to sound like I was singling you out, it just came out that way.

Further, Paul, when I read your post it seemed to me like you were saying that this is the way a business has to act. I was trying to flippantly comment that Disney has a budget larger than some small countries and simple economic strategies that seem “obvious” may not apply. For a case in point, look to this whole discussion. If WDW implemented this UFP through only one small travel agent as a freebee for using them, it would probably not greatly affect the rest of our line experience. ONCE it became public to the DVC population as a whole, that we are not able to use this perk with our DVC, it would potentially harm DVC sales in a big way. When WE signed up for DVC, we were supposedly given on-site guest privileges (like EE etc…). I do not think that they could give the UFP to all on-site guests without also giving them to the DVC members staying on property. My point is that all of these factors and more should be taken into account before the best course of action can be determined. Of late WDW has not made entirely wise economic decisions by any model that I have studied, but they have their model that they seem to use.

tinybubbles, I have to say that my DVC membership is probably the best investment I have made in the last three years. If I include the maintenance fees I have paid, and factor in what the rooms would have cost me by booking separately, I have gotten almost ¾ of my money back. I can also sell my points for close to what I have paid for it. Am I a sucker? Probably; Is it worth it? I think so.

I also want to restate that as it is, the FastPass system cannot accommodate the addition of the UFP. The Universal model would probably not hold (I am agreeing with you on this Paul) for Disney because of the sheer volume of patrons. What I like better about it at Universal is that the lines seem to be more evenly distributed. It is probably a volume of guests in line image that makes it seem more fair.



PS, Sorry again!

 

[SnackyStacky]

This is my last post on this subject because it seems to me that a few think I don't understand the differences on what's being debated. I suppose I just can't articulate myself well enough to get said people to understand that I really do understand the debate. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I don't get it.

You're making excellent arguments for not offering PFPs at all, but this has nothing to do with which groups it is offered to.

Yes it does. If that weren't the case, it would be a flat out "anybody can buy this privlege", but it's being offered to those who book through a very specific avenue. If it were an anybody can buy it situation, then sure! Let the DVCers have at it!!!!

The question for this thread is if you are going to accept that result, who are you going to alienate?

EXACTLY. And why should DVC not be alienated? So you put down a lot of money. So what? That's my point. Lots of people do. Maybe not all at once, but definitely lots of money. See below.

There is just no way that these folks are going to get p'd off that DVCers were allowed to PAY for something that everyone else can have for FREE

So wait a moment...

Through the the WDW website:

From 1/14 until 1/18: 4 nights at POFQ for 2 adults, 2 children, including roundtrip airfare from New York, NY, with UPH (which are the only option when booking a package):

$2,529.94

Booking each piece seperately for the same dates:

4 nights POFQ (if I remember the code price correctly..I'm using $89/night, with 11% taxes): $396

airfare for 4 on Jet Blue from New York, NY: $620

(4) 4 day hopper passes: $768

Total: $1784.00

Difference between package and self-bookings: $745.94

So basically, the Ultimate Fastpass is $187 per person. That's free? And that's my point! By booking a package, people ARE paying for that privlege, because you can get things a LOT cheaper by booking on your own than by getting a package.

How is that not in Disney's best interest? Because they lock you out of it. So if you REALLY want it, you can get it by going through WDTC or AAA. And then, they get even MORE money! So now the argument comes up that no DVCer will do that. Well, keep reading.

Put all those figures aside. Let's assume for a moment that this comes to pass, and they DON'T make it available to the DVC for a fee. You said yourself:

DVC is actually a VERY SMALL percentage of WDW's guests

as well as:

So will everybody else. But as a business, Disney needs to consider how many will vote by going elsewhere, using more, points for other venues, or even selling their interests.

So if the DVC is such a small percentage, then what difference does it make what happens with them?

You'll probably have a response for all of this, and that's fine. I just have to agree to disagree on this issue. So like I said, my last post on the topic.

Ohana, I'd be willing to call a truce! And you didn't have to eat crow on my account! Maybe someone else's, but not mine!

 

[d-r]

My WAG is that dvc makes up about 3-5% of wdw visitors. I am curious about what other people think, because I have to make assumptions to get at that, and I figure they are invalid, but it is the best guess I can come up with, and I get it thinking in a couple of different ways.

For example, I think there are about 60K dvc families (one flaw here is that I think this number is contracts, not families, but it doesn't really matter).

I figure that an average day attendance at the four parks is about 100K. I know some days are much higher and some are much lower, but I'm guessing on average that about 25K per park is close when it equals out. That totals to 36.5 million a year, and if you add up the yearly totals for the four parks that seems fairly close to me.

I figure that the average dvc family is more than 2. There are probably a few solo travelors, a very few. Probably more couples than solos. Probably more parents with one or more children. I think that to guess the average party size at 2.5 people is guessing low but fair.

So if there are 2.5 members per family and 60K families, that is 150,000 dvc visitors. So if each dvc visitor only came to a park once, it would be 1.5 days worth of visitors (assuming 100K visitors a day).

The minimum number of points is 150, so I figure that is more than a week, but people might choose larger accomodations. Also, people may have many more points than 150. But then, add ons may be counted as separate. And people may not go to parks every day. So here is a real leap of faith (as if all of this isn't built on wags) and I go with 1 week per family.

7 times 1.5 days = 10.5 days worth of visits due to dvc a year, divide that by 365 and you round up to 3 percent.

I think this is a pretty conservative wild *** guess, and if I do it a couple of different ways it comes out about the same. It tweaks up to about 5 percent if I base it on the number of rooms on property but that has a lot of guesses and assumptions built in to it.

So my guess is about 3-5% of visitors are dvc. What is your guess?

DR

 

[vernon]

I think you have to work on a higher number of "average" DVC visitors per point cost. IMHO a negligable number of people come alone to WDW, so minimum number of people is 2. For a studio you may be correct that 2.5 people is a useful guideline, but a large number of DVC rooms take more than 4 people. in theory many of your families could be groups of 12 (or more) for that reason I think somewhere between 4 and 5 is a realistic "average" number, that is probably more than the average number in each family, but I think almost every DVC member ends up taking family or friends as guests at least oce every three years.

Add ons are counted still as a part of a families " contract" so IMHO for the average number of points (considering 150 is the MINIMUM) you have to look between 250-300 points. I would argue that it is likely to be higher than that as, IMHO that seems the highest number of contacts are in that range, but there are more owners with 350 than there are with 150 and there are quite a few people with more than 350 and none with below 150.


I would guess your estimate is a little on the low side, I would go 4-7 % but that's because I'm conservative on the number of visits returning DVC members make, which brings me back to the original question about a break on ticket costs. With better break on tickets I think that could rise quite substantially. DVC members wouldn't be in the park all day, but it's likely they would go for 4-5 hours and include at least one meal in the parks many times, making them potentially a lucrative revenue stream when compared with the time they spend in the parks. IMHO with a decent break on ticket prices DVC members would spend say 3 half days in the parks instead of one whole day ( and going off site the other days) Disney picks up on a couple of meals, 5 or 6 extra drinks per group and probably gifts as well without an obvious loss on ticket revenue.

 

[raidermatt]

You'll probably have a response for all of this,

Of course!

And why should DVC not be alienated? So you put down a lot of money. So what? That's my point.

That's a heckuva point. While your conclusion may or may not be "right", the reasoning behind it is not what one would hope to hear from a service-oriented company. Maybe its Eisner reasoning, but it isn't Disney reasoning.

Lots of people do. Maybe not all at once, but definitely lots of money.

No, there are not lots of people shelling out $15,000+ dollars in advance, and committing to hundreds or even thousands of dollars in annual dues. That's not meant to belittle non-DVC'ers, but to say there is no difference in committment is baseless.

Regarding your calculations, is the PFP already being offered for WDW? If not, then the premium being paid has nothing to do with PFP.

So if the DVC is such a small percentage, then what difference does it make what happens with them?

Again, a simply horrible attitude for a service-oriented company. I don't know how else to put it.

How is that not in Disney's best interest?

Quite simply because there is more to Disney's long-term best interests than the immediate revenue stream.

 

[raidermatt]

Clearly Disney feels DVC is a good deal for them, or they wouldn't keep building DVC units.

Vernon, the multiple contract issue probably takes a hit out of your numbers.

Also, some guests exchange out and use their points elsewhere, but a lot of those are still used by other timeshare owners who exchange in.

I'd be VERY surprised if the percentage were as high as 7%, but 3% seems very reasonable.

So its a fairly small group, but still a significant one, especially when one considers that overall WDW attendance fell 6% last year.

And again, Disney obviously WANTS more DVC members, as they have another DVC on the way (Saratoga Springs), and another one announced but on hold (Eagle Pines).

 

[DisneyKidds]

How about this for a sanity check on DVC visitors as a % of the whole.

What are the total rooms/beds in the WDW inventory, and how many of those are DVC rooms/beds? Assuming that DVC and other WDW resorts run similar occupancy rates, this would give you a rough idea of the DVC guest base. The overall % might be a little less than the DVC % of rooms/beds due to DVC rooms allocated to CRO - but that is a pretty small number.

 

[MELSMICE]

JMO - but as I said before I wish FP was for those staying on site. DVC members or not. If you are staying at a Disney resort, you could use your room key to get a FP.

I have stayed on-site & off & I think it would be a great incentive to get people to stay on site. Nothing additional to purchase, just an incentive to stay on-site.

 

[raidermatt]

What are the total rooms/beds in the WDW inventory, and how many of those are DVC rooms/beds?

I'm pretty sure there are about 22,000 total rooms in WDW inventory, not including Pop Century.

Of that, DVC makes up the following:

Wilderness Lodge Villas - 181
Beach Club Villas - 225
Boardwalk Villas - 520
Old Key West - ???

So that's 926 not counting OKW, and prior to Saratoga Springs. I couldn't find OKW's count in anything I have with me right now. Anyone else know? I found something that says it has 56 three-story buildings...

926 is 4.2% of 22,000.

If I'm off, and WDW has 25,000 rooms, DVC (without OKW) would still be 3.7%.

True, there are some DVC rooms that are allocated back to CRO, but there are also some DVC members who stay on points at non-DVC resorts. Probably close to a wash.

So guessing 3% of WDW guests at a given time are DVC is looking to be on the low side.

 

[DC7800]

According to Mouseplanet, 704 rooms at Old Key West.

 

[raidermatt]

Thanks, DC.

So that's 1,676 DVC rooms, which is 7.6% of 22,000, and 6.7% of 25,000.