Fastpass return or replacement?

[Lashed34]

It would be interesting to see the data of who spends more in the parks at WDW, people in Deluxe, Moderate or Value.

Just because people book a value doesn't mean they are poorer, we stay in value because we feel it's a waste of money paying for a deluxe or moderate when we are out and about in the parks all day.

 

[charmed59]

I suspect the problem Disney found with the fast pass + was over the years the people who were really good at playing the system to get all the FP+ rides they wanted were not their highest spending per day customers. Even worse, some of their biggest spenders on a per day basis we’re finding they could overspend elsewhere and get premium service when it came to access to popular rides. So they were making their budget Disney 30 nights a year folks happy, but losing the folks that would spend the same amount in a week.

I’m an example. I can’t plan 60 days out, health and family issues make that impossible. However I do have money, and have no problem spending a couple thousand a day per person on vacation. I can stay at a premium resort at Universal and get on any ride I want with a short wait. I can stay at the Grand Floridian in a suite and still not be guaranteed a FP for FOP or other newer rides.

I grew up with Disney. Went to Disneyland more times than I can count. I’d be happy to spend a little more and go to Disney if they gave me perks for the money. They don’t. They gave the perks to their very dedicated followers just for being dedicated. They may be rethinking that.

 

[MS_Warrior]

Yeah, the OCD uber planners had a significantly different and better experience than others under the FP+ system. That gap in experience has narrowed in the absence of FP. A small percentage of guests (a lot of people on the Disboards, for example) had tremendous experiences, while the vast majority had some serious disappointments. They still had a good time, but the 2 groups were far apart. I would think Disney views this as a failure and would like to flatten that experience curve, so that people have a more uniform experience. Bottom line, whatever FP comes back as is probably not going to work as well for us uber planners as the old system did.

Perhaps in San Antonio! We have great public transportation - are used to tourists, etc.

Just realized I replied to the wrong comment and I can’t figure out how to delete! Please ignore me.

 

[cakebaker]

I suspect the problem Disney found with the fast pass + was over the years the people who were really good at playing the system to get all the FP+ rides they wanted were not their highest spending per day customers.

The easiest way to obtain FP+ for the hard to get rides was to spend more money. The longer your resort stay, the easier it was. The ones who had the most trouble were those staying off site or going for shorter trips. One of the biggest complaints I always heard was FP+ favored those who spent more, not that it was geared to guests with a tighter budget.

We spent a lot of money at WDW, stayed Deluxe or DVC almost always and visited 1-3 times a year. We bought expensive add ons and were definitely not a tight budget visitor.


There really was no playing of the system, rather having a good working knowledge of how the system worked was your best option. We rarely tried refreshing during the day, the 3 original FP's along with anything available during the day worked just fine. But even refreshing was not playing the system or taking advantage. It's up to guests to be familiar with how a system works and if you did, you could indeed get multiple hard to gets during the day.

 

[buzlite]

I am no FP expert and we only go to WDW once per year. However I am a businessman and I want to look at this topic from purely a business perspective. If I was in charge how would I analyze the situation?

First let's look at why FP was created (I think it was around 2000). Disney was trying to address two problems. First, guests complained that they had to wait in long lines. Second, Disney wanted guests to spend more in the stores. The idea behind FP (look this up on youtube and you'll see interviews saying this) was that a guest would shop rather than standing in line. Here was the vision: a guest wants to ride Thunder Mountain. They walk over and see a 1 hour wait time. But there is a fastpass machine! So the guest inserts their ticket and gets a return time an hour away. Instead of standing in that 1 hour line they are free to go buy a snack or buy a souvenir and then return to the ride one hour later and ride without a wait. The guest rides Thunder Mountain at the same time (1 hour away) so they are happy and they spend money on crap so Disney is happy. Win/Win!

We now have 20 years of data on what happened with Fastpass (doesn't matter if it was paper or FP+). I'd ask two questions from my analysis. First, did customer complaints from 2000-2019 decrease compared to 1980-1999 (of course adjusted for attendance)? Second, did spending increase (again based on attendance)? If the answer to one or both of those questions is "no" then there is no way I'd bring back Fastpass in any form close to what it was. As a businessman I realize Fastpass costs money. You have a separate line, you have employees checking to make sure the person has a FP. With FP+ you have technology support costs. So if it's not making the company more money than it's costing the company it should be scrapped entirely.

Would I give up on the Fastpass idea? No. I'd look at the competition. What does Universal do? What does Six Flags do? They both have paid FP options. I think universal has something for people who stay on site. The Six Flags Flash Pass annual pass addition costs 4 TIMES more than the normal annual pass. That is what I would choose for Disney if I was the CFO or Chief Parks Operations Executive. I'd go with a FP option that makes the company the most money. And I don't think paper FP or FP+ did that (of course I'd actually look at the data, but I personally think the data would not show any more spending or any fewer customer complaints).

I would say that this is an extremely poor way to evaluate the guest experience. Customers don't usually complain when they aren't happy. They just choose to spend their money elsewhere. It doesn't happy right away either. As more and more people see the loss in value they look to competitors. If competitors can then fill that need with better value customers will switch. The only thing that keeps customers despite lower value is a personal identity with a brand. If a brand appears to be losing that identity and is no longer a champion for shared values then people are even quicker to move on.
There is more to business, in a competitive environment, than increasing margins. People spend money on Disney merch because they want to connect with Disney's values (family, love, memories, dreaming etc).
We've seen so many businesses over the last decade, that have considered themselves indestructible, reduce value and increase margins only to be destroyed by a small upstart. (Ex Uber vs Taxi companies)
The business rules created by boomers are generally not effective any more. The most common rules in business now are to create a product that creates immense value for a lower cost to customers. Scale until you have deep market infiltration. Then create "add on" or "premium services" that cost more, have higher margins, lower value AND allow people to connect with the brand on a higher level.

This isn't accomplished by nickel and dining. Buying 1 FP at a time will create friction in the purchasing process. We will have to make too many individual purchasing decisions that will drive up stress and make it more clear in our mind about how much money we are spending at Disney. This will create a negative association. This is why magic band purchasing was created. To avoid having to pull out our CC and wallets.

Whatever Disney does, they really need to focus on the guest experience. People are not happy to pay individually for 1 ride. They may do it initially but will be annoyed. However people are willing to pay more for an experience that is more encapsulating of that dream family vacation. And they are happy with Disney for offering it.
Whatever Disney does, I hope they build it as a package that sells time, family, less stress and greater connection and not as a Carny asking for a tip so you can bypass the line.

 

[malba2366]

The core design of FP+ was flawed from the beginning. For example, If you have a 10,000 people going to MK on Jan 1st for 2 weeks and then another 10,000 going on Jan 7th for 1 week the vast majority of FP have gone for that 2nd week, and so it rolls on. Now multiply that ten fold, all year round and you have a huge issue with people unable to get FP for the most popular rides.

It was a flawed system to start with and got worse as the years went by. Just look at all the new on site accommodation that has been build since FP+ was introduced, it became impossible for the system to work - even more so when some accommodation got to book FP+ even further out from arrival.

This. Having to sit at your computer exactly 90 days out and scrambling to get fastpasses is not not a system that is working well. It didn't start out that way, but as time went on it devolved into that. It worked out for those in the know (myself included), but it doesn't work too well for the vast majority of the people in the park.

 

[jujubiee4]

It would be interesting to see the data of who spends more in the parks at WDW, people in Deluxe, Moderate or Value.

Just because people book a value doesn't mean they are poorer, we stay in value because we feel it's a waste of money paying for a deluxe or moderate when we are out and about in the parks all day.

Not to mention how many will stay in Value so they have MORE money to spend in the parks.

 

[Lashed34]

Not to mention how many will stay in Value so they have MORE money to spend in the parks.

Oh absolutely, on our last 2 week trip (from the UK) we spent a small fortune and had a fantastic time. For us, there's no point in going unless you can just kick back and not be obsessed with counting the dimes. A value resort stay gives us so much more freedom, although I 100% appreciate others love their deluxe/moderate stays for a bit of luxury.

 

[cdurham1]

Not to mention how many will stay in Value so they have MORE money to spend in the parks.

I would be willing to wager a small fortune that the average spend inside the parks is MUCH higher for those staying at a deluxe resort. You can find anecdotal stories otherwise, but that is just not how consumer spending works on average. It doesn't really matter, though.

 

[goaljira]

Even staying in a value doesn't mean its cheap. If you get a family suite in AoA then you're looking at high moderate or low deluxe level pricing, and from what is being touted as a possible here they'd be treated the same as someone in a basic room in All-stars?

 

[Lashed34]

I would be willing to wager a small fortune that the average spend inside the parks is MUCH higher for those staying at a deluxe resort. You can find anecdotal stories otherwise, but that is just not how consumer spending works on average. It doesn't really matter, though.

I would politely disagree with you. People staying in a deluxe will probably visit the parks for the least amount of time, they would also "probably" eat out of the parks the majority of the time and therefore, in the parks would spend less.

 

[Lashed34]

Even staying in a value doesn't mean its cheap. If you get a family suite in AoA then you're looking at high moderate or low deluxe level pricing, and from what is being touted as a possible here they'd be treated the same as someone in a basic room in All-stars?

When we review costs for our next holiday, it's frightening at how much it is for 2 weeks WITHOUT tickets and other add ons. We always book 18 months out so we always find a price that's best for us, but I agree AoA have very high price points for what it is - and it can't be because of the Skyliner because POP prices are lower.

 

[Marionnette]

I would politely disagree with you. People staying in a deluxe will probably visit the parks for the least amount of time, they would also "probably" eat out of the parks the majority of the time and therefore, in the parks would spend less.

And you base this assumption on...?

It would be interesting to know the number of hotel nights vs. park days at each resort level. I think we would be surprised to learn the results, which Disney already knows.

I'm sure that they also have plenty of data that gives them a good idea of per capita spending on a daily basis, income levels of the average resort guest, who is more likely to do signature dining vs ordering pizza delivery and so on.

But knowing none of this information myself, I wouldn't make a blind assumption about the spending habits of the average Deluxe guests or any other guest. So, what info do you have that leads you to make this statement?

 

[Grasshopper2016]

But when was the last time they had reliable data about shopper behavior when it’s a level playing field for all park guests? I bet whatever data they have is completely outdated.

This season before the 50th is a perfect time to get that data.

I like this idea. But I'm afraid that, with Covid messing up everything, now is not a good time to try to measure typical guest behavior. Decisions about indoor shopping, dining, going back to the resort for a break, etc., are being artificially influenced by the pandemic. I doubt that Disney could rely on current data to predict post-pandemic decisionmaking.

 

[snowwhite84]

I would politely disagree with you. People staying in a deluxe will probably visit the parks for the least amount of time, they would also "probably" eat out of the parks the majority of the time and therefore, in the parks would spend less.

But why would this equate to less spending? Even if they are not in the parks for 10 hours a day, if they are on property they are still spending money. Do you assume they aren’t spending money if they aren’t in the parks?

It’s an interesting point to me because I’m one of these guests. I typically stay deluxe , I’m in the park for four or five hours a day, but once we leave the parks we are still spending plenty of money. We don’t leave Disney property at all.

 

[luv2cheer92]

I would politely disagree with you. People staying in a deluxe will probably visit the parks for the least amount of time, they would also "probably" eat out of the parks the majority of the time and therefore, in the parks would spend less.

Anecdotal of course, but that's exactly how we do it. The trips at deluxe resorts, I spend more time at the hotel, and I spend less money on other things (merch, dining, etc). I'm currently debating on whether to change my current reservation at AoA to Boardwalk for the 50th. If I change it, I will not be spending anywhere near as much time or money at the parks. I will cancel at least a couple of our dining reservations and go with QS for those instead.

 

[jujubiee4]

I think we can all agree we vacation differently. We usually combine a cruise with a deluxe stay and no
way I spend a lot after paying for that. I just need a nice place to relax afterwards so the kids can run
the parks. If we stay moderate that is a separate trip and I spend more money because we have more.

I would be interested in the seasonal data because no matter where we stay we spend WAY MORE money
when we go Christmas season. I don't mind going all out then. Other times I will budget. So it will
be nice to know what is going on with FP...paid or not so please Disney release more info!

 

[Datfan1]

I would be willing to wager a small fortune that the average spend inside the parks is MUCH higher for those staying at a deluxe resort. You can find anecdotal stories otherwise, but that is just not how consumer spending works on average. It doesn't really matter, though.

Agree. Actually common sense. I would assume those staying in deluxe+ have more money to spend. To say that that those staying in Value resorts spend more time or money in the Parks doesn’t jive.

 

[luv2cheer92]

Agree. Actually common sense. I would assume those staying in deluxe+ have more money to spend. To say that that those staying in Value resorts spend more time or money in the Parks doesn’t jive.

I think everyone's different. I can afford deluxe, and stay there sometimes. But I will often book values so we can spend more money on other things. I'm usually one that likes to be at parks from rope drop to closing every single day, no afternoon breaks and no resort days. So it doesn't always make sense for us to pay deluxe prices for a room to sleep and shower. But staying a value gives us that, and then allows us to spend a whole lot more money else where. But at the same time, our overall spending is likely to be pretty similar either way we go.
Seems logical to me.

 

[Disneylover99]

[

I think we can all agree we vacation differently. We usually combine a cruise with a deluxe stay and no
way I spend a lot after paying for that. I just need a nice place to relax afterwards so the kids can run
the parks. If we stay moderate that is a separate trip and I spend more money because we have more.

I would be interested in the seasonal data because no matter where we stay we spend WAY MORE money
when we go Christmas season. I don't mind going all out then. Other times I will budget. So it will
be nice to know what is going on with FP...paid or not so please Disney release more info!

I think if you typically stay Deluxe, but move down to a moderate or value resort, you may be thinking, I have extra to spend with the money I’m saving.

But I think the bulk of people who typically stay at a value/moderate are just planning a vacation within their budget. They’re not thinking, look at the extra money we have because we didn’t book deluxe.