It's wrong to compare FP+ to FP-

[JeremyGNJ]

FP+ is not a "modification to FastPass". You can not compare it that way. The only way to properly look at FP+ is to compare it "no FP at all".

Why? Because Disney looked at FP- and said "this isn't right, some people are riding the headliners 2-4 times a day with no wait, while other people are standing in line for 2 hours just to ride once".

Therefore FP- was going to be eliminated, regardless of what system took it's place.

The biggest complaint about FP+ that I read is: "I cannot do as many attractions with FP+ as I did with FP- before". However the FP+ system was designed specifically so that you cannot "go commando" like you used to, since this was basically at the expense of other visitors.

Compare it to a theme park which has NO system for by-passing lines, and it's a pretty decent system.

 

[Praying Colonel]

FP+ is not a "modification to FastPass". You can not compare it that way. The only way to properly look at FP+ is to compare it "no FP at all".

Why? Because Disney looked at FP- and said "this isn't right, some people are riding the headliners 2-4 times a day with no wait, while other people are standing in line for 2 hours just to ride once".

Therefore FP- was going to be eliminated, regardless of what system took it's place.

The biggest complaint about FP+ that I read is: "I cannot do as many attractions as with FP+ as I did with FP- before". However the FP+ system was designed specifically so that you cannot "go commando" like you used to, since this was basically at the expense of other visitors.

Compare it to a theme park which has NO system for by-passing lines, and it's a pretty decent system.

Sorry--have to respectfully disagree. I disagree with your premise that FP- was going away regardless, and the alleged reasons for it going away. That's all speculation. There's no proof WDW saw it that way, and if they did they could've made internal changes to FP- to keep it from being used that way. For example, they could've begun enforcing the window a lot sooner than they did (which was in preparation for FP+). Also, they could've changed the FP distribution rules so that you could only get another FP 2 hours (or longer) after getting the 1st FP. Instead, one could get a FP as soon as the window for that FP opened. For example, if you pulled a FP at 9 am and your return time was 9:45, WDW permitted you to get another FP at 9:45. They could've easily changed their algorithm so you couldn't get another FP until 11 am (or later).

Even if that weren't the case, there's no way to avoid comparisons between the 2. For me, I've only attended WDW in a FastPass world: my 1st visit was 04. You take my FP and replace it with another FP system, I sure as heck am going to compare the 2.

 

[lovesdumbo]

I don't think Disney was looking to make things fair. Disney is looking for a monetary return on the investment of MDE.

With MDE they get more folks staying in Disney owned resorts, committing more fully to a Disney vacation 60 days out and Disney says spending more money in the park.

Of course folks are going to compare the experiences they used to have to what they have now.

 

[Herbie]

ITS ALL ABOUT THE $$$$$

 

[Reddog1134]

I believe FP- went away only because Disney wanted to implement FP+ and didn't want both running at the same time.

The reason they wanted to implement FP+ is because their research showed that having "appointments/reservations" made you less likely to wander off-site.

So they DID want to make it fair, but not for the sake of being fair. They just wanted everyone making "appointments".

 

[agavegirl1]

The intention of MM+ including FP+ was to "lock in" the guests time on Disney property to prevent them from being enticed by other Orlando options. "This way we get a larger share of their wallet" to quote Tom Staggs.

 

[mesaboy2]

FP+ is not a "modification to FastPass". You can not compare it that way. The only way to properly look at FP+ is to compare it "no FP at all".
Why? Because Disney looked at FP- and said "this isn't right, some people are riding the headliners 2-4 times a day with no wait, while other people are standing in line for 2 hours just to ride once".

Therefore FP- was going to be eliminated, regardless of what system took it's place.

The biggest complaint about FP+ that I read is: "I cannot do as many attractions with FP+ as I did with FP- before". However the FP+ system was designed specifically so that you cannot "go commando" like you used to, since this was basically at the expense of other visitors.

Compare it to a theme park which has NO system for by-passing lines, and it's a pretty decent system.

Because that way is the only way FP+ doesn't look like a steaming pile?

 

[mom2AidanAndEli]

Do you honestly think Disney really cares how many times you ride a ride? Or whether someone else gets to or not? Or what's fair? Above everything else, Disney is a business. This has absolutely nothing to do with "fair". This has to do with what's going to make them more money! They're encouraging you to SPEND for onsite stays. They're encouraging you to go in use your FP+ and then have lots of extra time for dining, shopping, SPENDING! They locking you in 60 days out so you'll be sure to be in the park, SPENDING, on that day, not just relaxing by a pool. They're probably going to head to more FPs for higher-level resorts, i.e. SPENDING more on Deluxe so you get more FPs. Or they may just charge right out for additional FPs, i.e. get your first 3 free, but then SPEND for more.

Are you seeing a theme here.....

 

[WillAustin]

The only comparison to make is FP+ vs. what we were able to do before. Is it better or worse? For us, worse. My bottom line is how it affects my family is all that matters to me when I'm paying for it.

 

[Momtomouselover]

I believe FP- went away only because Disney wanted to implement FP+ and didn't want both running at the same time.

The reason they wanted to implement FP+ is because their research showed that having "appointments/reservations" made you less likely to wander off-site.

So they DID want to make it fair, but not for the sake of being fair. They just wanted everyone making "appointments".

This is my major problem with it. I hate appointments! I can't stand scheduling in advance and having an appointment. Even an "appointment" for something fun bothers me and feels like it is hemming me in. Vacation by appointment doesn't fit my style. If I was handed three FP's in the morning and could just use them on whatever/whenever I could probably handle that. I would think 3 paled compared to FP- but far better than 3 by appt. Blech!

On our last trip having three FP's did not keep us in the park. When the three were done and if lines were long then we were done too. I may try rope drop some on this trip but it is again another scheduling issue I don't like.

 

[DisneyFive]

Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree.

Of course we're going to compare FP- to FP+, and it is a valid, fair comparison to make!

Heck, Disney themselves are comparing it to the previous paper FastPass system by calling the new system FastPass Plus! They didn't try to call it something new like Disney Line Blitz, or Sppedy Lines, or Zippitee-Doo-Dah Pass. They call it FastPass+.

FP- and FP+ are the only systems of their kind that Disney has had available for the last decade or more, so of course the comparison should be made. Rightfully so!

Dan

 

[siskaren]

Also, they could've changed the FP distribution rules so that you could only get another FP 2 hours (or longer) after getting the 1st FP. Instead, one could get a FP as soon as the window for that FP opened. For example, if you pulled a FP at 9 am and your return time was 9:45, WDW permitted you to get another FP at 9:45. They could've easily changed their algorithm so you couldn't get another FP until 11 am (or later).

Actually, when it was first introduced, you had to wait until your FP window opened before you could get your next FP. I remember one time debating if I should get a FP for Splash Mountain because the return time was something like 5 hours out, and I knew I wouldn't be able to get another one until then.

 

[mom2AidanAndEli]

FP+ is not a "modification to FastPass". You can not compare it that way. The only way to properly look at FP+ is to compare it "no FP at all".

Why? Because Disney looked at FP- and said "this isn't right, some people are riding the headliners 2-4 times a day with no wait, while other people are standing in line for 2 hours just to ride once".

Therefore FP- was going to be eliminated, regardless of what system took it's place.

The biggest complaint about FP+ that I read is: "I cannot do as many attractions with FP+ as I did with FP- before". However the FP+ system was designed specifically so that you cannot "go commando" like you used to, since this was basically at the expense of other visitors.

Compare it to a theme park which has NO system for by-passing lines, and it's a pretty decent system.

Or compare it to Universal where on-site guests get to bypass all day, not just for three rides! Doesn't sound so decent then...

 

[Wishes Count]

Or compare it to Universal where on-site guests get to bypass all day, not just for three rides! Doesn't sound so decent then...

Universal has far less attendance than WDW. There is no feasible way WDW could adopt this method.

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

 

[Praying Colonel]

Actually, when it was first introduced, you had to wait until your FP window opened before you could get your next FP. I remember one time debating if I should get a FP for Splash Mountain because the return time was something like 5 hours out, and I knew I wouldn't be able to get another one until then.

Yep. I'd read here that the original algorithm was more restrictive, but over time WDW relaxed it so that guests could get more FPs.

 

[JeremyGNJ]

Do you honestly think Disney really cares how many times you ride a ride? Or whether someone else gets to or not? Or what's fair? Above everything else, Disney is a business. This has absolutely nothing to do with "fair". This has to do with what's going to make them more money! They're encouraging you to SPEND for onsite stays. They're encouraging you to go in use your FP+ and then have lots of extra time for dining, shopping, SPENDING! They locking you in 60 days out so you'll be sure to be in the park, SPENDING, on that day, not just relaxing by a pool. They're probably going to head to more FPs for higher-level resorts, i.e. SPENDING more on Deluxe so you get more FPs. Or they may just charge right out for additional FPs, i.e. get your first 3 free, but then SPEND for more.

Are you seeing a theme here.....

When the stories come back from vacation as "we paid $80 a day to wait in line and only went on 4 rides"....then yes, this is a business case for making the system more fair.

 

[mom2AidanAndEli]

Universal has far less attendance than WDW. There is no feasible way WDW could adopt this method.

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

Never said WDW should. Just that other places have other perks, other ways of handling lines, and FP+ isn't necessarily better than them all, as the OP implied.

 

[jade1]

I would compare it to making FP- modified to: one every 4 hours, no duplicates, tiers and one park only.

It's the only comparable option they had to disperse evenly IMO.

So in that case it's much better IMO.

 

[mom2AidanAndEli]

When the stories come back from vacation as "we paid $80 a day to wait in line and only went on 4 rides"....then yes, this is a business case for making the system more fair.

Ummm.....aren't you hearing more of those stories now with FP+ in place?????

 

[Jennasis]

Hogwash.