Extra Fastpasses: A Case Study

[SuperRob]

Sorry, it still puts them in used car salesman territory. They categorized people's expensive trips as acceptable losses. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on whether that is a smart business strategy.

You do understand that if Disney disclosed every little thing going on in the parks that they would lose tons of money, right? There's always something changing. There's always a ride down for refurb. Nothing at Disney is ever going to be finished. Guests have an idealized version of what the parks are like in their heads, and Disney is fighting against that perception constantly. Guests want more experiences (listen to the clammor about MOAR RIDEZ), but they don't want that change to impact their vacation.

My first Disney trip ever was my honeymoon, and the Grand Floridian building where we stayed was getting some refurb work done. Did it suck to have to see scaffolds on the outside of several buildings? Yeah, but I'm really glad we booked that hotel, because it was an outstanding experience. But here's the thing ... if I had known about it in advance, and didn't realize how minimal that would be to the experience, would I have booked that hotel? No, I wouldn't, and Disney would have lost some of that revenue. I would have also given myself far lower expectations, and basically have robbed myself of the trip I'd wanted since I was a kid. Instead, I have wonderful memories of my first trip.

Yes, it sucks that they basically "sprung" MyMagic+ on people. (Honestly, I don't know how you can call it that since they were pretty good about sending out information, I thought, but I'll go with it.) But the fact is, they needed people to be coming to the parks just like usual in order to make sure the data they were collecting was accurate (not to mention hitting revenue targets). I will admit that I'm surprised that part of the budget for MM+ wasn't set aside to spread a little pixie dust around for the guests that were unusually impacted. But to be completely frank, expecting Disney to communicate changes like these up front is unreasonable, because it doesn't line up with how Disney has ever handled their business. They don't want to set a negative impression before you've ever gotten to the resort.

Everyone wants their trip to be perfect. No trip ever is, we just gloss over or gradually forget the stuff that went wrong. That's human nature. But the more you tell people up front how lousy their trip is going to be, the more that perception carries with them and colors the entire experience. THIS is why Disney doesn't communicate these things. If you let things just happen, the negatives are rarely remembered, but if you set them up for disappointment, they frequently will be.

For that first trip, I was that guest that went in cold. I thought I had done my planning, but I really didn't know much, I didn't know about any of the websites or blogs. We went in August, we flew by the seat of our pants, we didn't even go to Animal Kingdom at all on a seven-day trip. The crowds, the lines, the work being done around the resort isn't a negative memory, it's just ... there. The rest are filled with the bits that I enjoyed so much, that I still have positive memories even though it was the honeymoon for a marriage that no longer exists. I had such happy memories that I honeymooned there a second time with my new wife, and created those same happy memories for her.

This is why I've been so upset with people on these boards (most of whom haven't used it yet) talking about how much FP+ sucks. People come here for help with planning trips of a lifetime, and while giving information is all well and good, giving it tinged with negative expectations ruins other people's trips. It's completely unnecessary. I get that I'm spitting in the wind here, because people are going to spread FUD and disharmony because we're anonymous, and who gives a flying f, but that's because they don't have to deal with the aftermath. Heck, even I've been guilty of doing that on occasion. But the fact is, there's a way to have people plan these trips that gives them information to help make their trip better without forcing your negative emotions about it on them.

Yeah, if I were in charge, there are things I might have done differently, but I don't have anywhere close to complete information. Maybe they actually did handle it in the best way possible. But as I've frequently said, the rides are not the end-all, be-all of a Disney trip, and if you stay laser-focused on getting in as many rides as possible, you're short-changing yourself. There is so much to experience outside of a queue. But if Disney had been completely frank about what was working, what wasn't, and what not, they'd probably have created negative memories for far more guests than they actually did. And clearly the number of guests who were impacted was minimal, because Disney considers the project a pretty big success at this point. Sure, minimal might still have been thousands of guests, because WDW is the number one vacation spot in the world. Most of us aren't used to dealing with that kind of scale, so we see a lobby with a line of twenty guests who can't get their bands to let them into their room. What we don't see are the thousands that DID get into their room just fine. We see the lines at kiosks and assume everyone is having problems, when maybe they just have questions. We see lines at FP entrances and times going up in Standby, and we assume the system isn't working, and not that there's just one guy holding up the line because he can't find his MagicBand that he took off at lunch. We don't see the full picture, but we assume its a disaster and spread that around like it's truth. We do everyone a disservice when we do that.

End Rant. Now I'm going to go get my coffee.

 

[morethananyonex]

I get what you're saying here, but to consider the probability of a possibility occurring, history is usually a pretty good indicator. The patent wasn't just for a new thing, rather, for a new thing to replace an existing thing.

Absent some statement of intent, the probability of monetizing FP+ was always lower than the probability of additional FPs being added - if only for the reason that the ability to monetize FP has always been a possibility that was not acted upon.

I don't disagree with you there. I am still not convinced they will be directly monetized, ever. I agree that the likelihood of extra FP at no cost was always higher.

I was just pointing out that when someone tried to use the patent to argue what could possibly come at some point, they were told it was ridiculous. Just thought it was funny that now the patent is being used to prove something that already happened.

Just to note, I'm not implying jade1 was involved in that, just don't think the people who were are going to come out and call her ridiculous for using the patent to back up her argument.

 

[2Tiggies]

I don't really see this happening, as I think the system will know when it needs to offer sooner times and when not to on its own, but it could be done.

I hope you're right. Sending texts is a great feature, but completely useless to anyone not on/using a data plan or on a US based cellular network. And emails ... well that's one thing we actually can turn off in the parks and I'd like to keep it that way if possible

 

[jade1]

But for those that think that the current system was "in the cards" all along, well, I'd like some of what you are drinking.

Just thought it was funny that now the patent is being used to prove something that already happened.

just don't think the people who were are going to come out and call her ridiculous for using the patent to back up her argument.

Your still missing the point completely.

This was why the patent was brought up-to show IT WAS IN THE CARDS ALL ALONG.

Literally written down in the cards 7 years ago.

 

[OtherScott]

Heck if they want-they can text mom2rtk who is in the park that a TSM FP+ is about to go to waste-it's yours if you want it.

All kidding aside, imagine the outcry when, in addition to you reaching out to HAL to request something, HAL reaches out to you to offer something - "Oh great, now you have to have a smartphone turned on to maximize your experience!"

 

[jade1]

All kidding aside, imagine the outcry when, in addition to you reaching out to HAL to request something, HAL reaches out to you to offer something - "Oh great, now you have to have a smartphone turned on to maximize your experience!"

Yep, or God forbid here is a TSM that is available for..................wait for it..............$5.

But yea the point is this system can find ways to minimize waste.

 

[famy27]

Can't you see from a business perspective that this is EXACTLY why they didn't tell people there might be issues? I get that it wasn't "fair" to guests that vacationed between Jan and Mar but they weren't going to say "oh and by the way, in April we will be fully implementing this system, so why don't you just hold off until then?"

At the end of the day, their primary objective is to make money.

Of course that's why they didn't tell people. But that doesn't make it right. What if they didn't tell people the pool was going to be closed at a resort? They almost always disclose that type of info and allow people to plan accordingly. That isn't just a Disney practice. Most hotels/resorts let you know in advance if something may negatively impact your trip (construction, elevators out of order, etc). So you can decide when and how to spend your money.

I am staying at Poly in August. I am aware of the construction, but I got a great deal/huge discount, so it's worth it to me. If I showed up there on August 14th and found no pool, no waterfall, restaurants closed, ceremonial hall pulled apart, and I was paying $500 per night and had received no advanced notice of these changes, you can bet I'd blame Disney for not being transparent.

If only 50% of guests were using paper FPs and many of those were only using 1-3 per day, the number of people who would have been scared off by the FP+ changes should have theoretically been pretty low. So, why the need for secrecy? And if the changes are so bad/negative that they scare off thousands and thousands of guests, then they might have wanted to reconsider their roll-out plan.

 

[jimmysmom74]

As someone who visited in November(liked FP+ with the additional use of legacy) and March(spring break lines and FP+3 and done system), I was a little sour at what the FP system had become. I was a huge supporter of the MDE until then. I agree, that WDW had worked in modifications and that 3 and done was not the end product, but how they planned to change it was not decided completely until feedback from the last 3+months rolled in.

1. The use of the FP+ system always had to eventually add in park hopping(or they would have seen the park hopper portion of the ticket decrease in sales).

2. I do think how, and to who, the additional FP+ were distributed to was in question though. Would they give them to deluxe hotel guests? Would they only be for onsite guests? Would they include them as a perk in a promotion? I think the research that came out of the last test showed they needed something that was fair across the board. And that they would loss consumers if they were left with only 3 FP+ per day.

3. I like the changes...I wish they would have came faster. And I do think that if they would have had a extended promotion during those 3 months of testing it would have helped the medicine go done. Maybe something like this..."During our Winter testing of MDE we will be extending free dining". Just so people could say, "well, I did get that bonus free dining" or whatever. Just my opinion!!

 

[famy27]

Too much either/or, IMO

Well, I'll 100% believe that it's both. But you won't convince me it's neither.

 

[jade1]

Of course that's why they didn't tell people. But that doesn't make it right. What if they didn't tell people the pool was going to be closed at a resort? They almost always disclose that type of info and allow people to plan accordingly. That isn't just a Disney practice. Most hotels/resorts let you know in advance if something may negatively impact your trip (construction, elevators out of order, etc). So you can decide when and how to spend your money.

I am staying at Poly in August. I am aware of the construction, but I got a great deal/huge discount, so it's worth it to me. If I showed up there on August 14th and found no pool, no waterfall, restaurants closed, ceremonial hall pulled apart, and I was paying $500 per night and had received no advanced notice of these changes, you can bet I'd blame Disney for not being transparent.

If only 50% of guests were using paper FPs and many of those were only using 1-3 per day, the number of people who would have been scared off by the FP+ changes should have theoretically been pretty low. So, why the need for secrecy? And if the changes are so bad/negative that they scare off thousands and thousands of guests, then they might have wanted to reconsider their roll-out plan.

Happened to us at SAB-in fairness they were working on one area at a time they said,but something broke and shut it all down.

As for initial rollout, My DD went to Disney then (offsite) and loved FP+ walked into the park and grabbed 3 for the day-way better than FP- according to her.

She knew/heard there would be future enhancements and thought that was even better news.

 

[Day-Day]

I came on here to learn something that may be useful for my WDW visit next week.

The OP should have requested "No Debates".

 

[leebee]

You are wasting your breath with something this factual on this board. Be prepared for the responses that you are just drinking the Disney Kool Aid

There are a lot of people on this board who apparently think this money was all spent on FP+. Even some of those who seem intelligent enough to know better can't resist making countless jokes about how Disney spent billions of dollars just to get rid of slips of paper.

I think the same people who don't appreciate this reality also don't understand the complexity of putting something of this magnitude into effect in a theme park environment. It isn't the kind of system that you can run in parallel until it is thoroughly tested and debugged before being released to the public.

Bolding is mine and I AM intelligent enough to realize that Disney spent this kind of money of something more than FP+; I was making a joke, and I even put the in there to indicate such!

I have to comment regarding the patent application and the questions of whether Disney had this all planned out 7 years ago when they filed. When you file a patent application, you file it for the broadest applications imaginable. You try to include every possible iteration and interpretation for how your invention might be used in the future, even if you have no intention of doing it that way. It's how you protect your intellectual property, and keep anyone else from using it. It's not just the concept itself of which you gain ownership, but also every imaginable application. That way, you are protected from paying for the time and materials to develop something and then having Joe Schmoe down the street (whose initials just might be US/IOA) use it without having invested a cent. There is no way of knowing HOW/IF Disney intended to use/apply this stuff when they filed the patent- whether they really intended for guests to be able to piggyback more FP+ onto a day or not, etc.- but they were clearly prepared to protect themselves from having others use it. It is QUITE possible that Disney rolled out what they hoped would be the most cost effective iteration for them, that would (a) keep people in the parks and (b) keep them spending money, and then tweaked from there to make it even more profitable, based on how things were working. I don't believe that Disney added the option of a 4th (and more) FP+ to keep people happy; I think they listened to the complaints and saw that guests were becoming frustrated, leaving the park, threatening not to visit again, canceling vacations, etc., and changed the plan because it would mean more money for Disney, NOT because it meant happier guests and

I feel badly for the guests who paid full-price (and yes, that includes those with room discounts or UT tickets, etc) for their vacation and were frustrated by having only FP+ (no double dipping), spending long hours at kiosks and guest services, having FP+s "magically" disappear, etc. There is plenty that Disney could have done to take the sting out of this. At check-in at POP, there could have been the amazing "dinner on us" coupon as a thank-you for participating in our testing of the new FP+. Boy, wouldn't THAT have been pixie dust, to get a voucher for $X dollars off per adult meal, $Y dollars off per kid meal, at the restaurant of your choice! Disney understands the concept of return for investment (look at all those $200 gift cards for doing the DVC tour… and yes, we did the tour for $100 one time, and super fastpasses another time, knowing full well we weren't going to buy, but Disney was still happy to take a chance on us) and could have come up with something that made guest feel they were being compensated for helping with the test (NOT being guinea pigs, but for being a participant in shaping the future of DisneyWorld). It always surprised me that Disney didn't figure out how to put a positive spin on something that had the potential to be so harmful to their image.

 

[OtherScott]

...to learn something that may be useful...

Page 1 of any thread - after that, it's either redundant or an argument...

Think of it as "DIS+"

 

[jade1]

I have to comment regarding the patent application and the questions of whether Disney had this all planned out 7 years ago when they filed. When you file a patent application, you file it for the broadest applications imaginable. You try to include every possible iteration and interpretation for how your invention might be used in the future, even if you have no intention of doing it that way. It's how you protect your intellectual property, and keep anyone else from using it. It's not just the concept itself of which you gain ownership, but also every imaginable application. That way, you are protected from paying for the time and materials to develop something and then having Joe Schmoe down the street (whose initials just might be US/IOA) use it without having invested a cent. There is no way of knowing HOW/IF Disney intended to use/apply this stuff when they filed the patent- whether they really intended for guests to be able to piggyback more FP+ onto a day or not, etc.- but they were clearly prepared to protect themselves from having others use it. It is QUITE possible that Disney rolled out what they hoped would be the most cost effective iteration for them, that would (a) keep people in the parks and (b) keep them spending money, and then tweaked from there to make it even more profitable, based on how things were working. I don't believe that Disney added the option of a 4th (and more) FP+ to keep people happy; I think they listened to the complaints and saw that guests were becoming frustrated, leaving the park, threatening not to visit again, canceling vacations, etc., and changed the plan because it would mean more money for Disney, NOT because it meant happier guests and

Good points for sure, they will never use the in-room TV reserving either now, but having the recently implemented enhancements in there certainly should not surprise folks once it is implemented-as a possibility all along-it proves it was a possibility all along. If it was not in there-you could argue it maybe was not a possibility all along.

Secondly-it's a conversion to a much larger adaptable system-that system needed to be in place to roll out what processes they choose and how and when.

That's FP+

Many folks said the "+" stood for limitations. I could never understand that conclusion, and now we are seeing why.

 

[mom2rtk]

You do understand that if Disney disclosed every little thing going on in the parks that they would lose tons of money, right?

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I said they should disclose every little thing. Or where you got the idea that ride access was a little thing.

2. I do think how, and to who, the additional FP+ were distributed to was in question though. Would they give them to deluxe hotel guests? Would they only be for onsite guests? Would they include them as a perk in a promotion? I think the research that came out of the last test showed they needed something that was fair across the board. And that they would loss consumers if they were left with only 3 FP+ per day.

Yes, that. I still think they hoped to keep more back for incentives (surprise and delight anyone?) but the have had to ante up and add more back in to the base system to quiet the masses.

All kidding aside, imagine the outcry when, in addition to you reaching out to HAL to request something, HAL reaches out to you to offer something - "Oh great, now you have to have a smartphone turned on to maximize your experience!"

Yep, that's precisely why I'm not at all excited about the potential for "surprise and delight". Every step of the way this thing seems to require having my phone in my hand more and more of the day. I wonder if I could request that HAL tap me on the shoulder instead? I suppose we should all keep the volume up on our phones how too so we'll know when HAL has something for us? Phones will be going off in shows more than ever I guess.

 

[OtherScott]

changed the plan because it would mean more money for Disney, NOT because it meant happier guests and

Serious question: How does Disney do one without doing the other? I mean, you can get away with it if you're in the healthcare industry, or public utilities, or housing, maybe insurance.

But a theme park?

 

[wisblue]

On the subject of patents, I'm not sure everyone is even referring to the same one. There has been some discussion on the boards about a patent application that was published on January 17, 2013 titled "Guest Experience Management System and Method".

Now there is a reference to a patent (I don't know if that was just a publication or an actually granted patent) from 7 years ago. That must be something different.

If you did a thorough search you might find that a company like Disney has several patents and patent applications pending at any given time.

 

[OtherScott]

2. I do think how, and to who, the additional FP+ were distributed to was in question though. Would they give them to deluxe hotel guests? Would they only be for onsite guests? Would they include them as a perk in a promotion? I think the research that came out of the last test showed they needed something that was fair across the board. And that they would loss consumers if they were left with only 3 FP+ per day.

How, yes. To who, probably not.

Had they ever done that before? If monetizing FPs was a goal, simple coding of then-current RFID cards could have decreased wait times for any segment of guest they chose.

 

[wisblue]

Over the years, we have gotten various notices from Disney about things relating to upcoming trips. They have involved things like pool closings, food court and restaurant closings, and the temporary removal of refrigerators from guest rooms. These things show to me that Disney is concerned about having guests informed about what is going on in their resorts.

I have never gotten a specific notice about things going on in the parks, like ride closures, construction walls, etc.

As I said in my previous lengthy post, I really don't know how Disney could have sent meaningful notices to guests about the evolution of FP+ and the elimination of paper FP, even if they had wanted to, without creating more problems than they would have solved.

Things like pool and food court closings are easy to explain because everyone can understand and visualize them. To understand a notice relating to FP and FP+, someone would have to understand how the whole paper FP system worked in the first place, which we know that a lot of people didn't. Then trying to explain how FP+ works would be even more confusing. All a notice like that would be likely to do is confuse the heck out of people and make them apprehensive about something about which they were blissfully ignorant before. For a lot of them, to be told when they arrived that they would be able to make reservations for 3 rides in advance every day, they probably DID consider that to be a positive because they had no idea about FPs before.

Look, I get it. There were some people that feel like their trips were adversely affected in a significant way by FP+ and that they would have liked to have known more in advance what they were going to be facing. And, if you were one of those people, I hope that you let Disney know how disappointed you were and that Disney was able to do something for you to at least mitigate that disappointment.

 

[2Tiggies]

I came on here to learn something that may be useful for my WDW visit next week.

The OP should have requested "No Debates".

Well then you would have learned nothing at all! If everyone complied with a no debates request, nobody would post. At least on this topic.