Just a FP+ Thought...Don't Have to Like My Opinion!

[mom2rtk]

Let's assume for a moment that FP+ is intended to get people to relax more and smell the roses. When the MK first opened, you paid around $5 to get in, you used your 7 attraction tickets, (or later 11), and your day was done. Lots of time for parades, pools, etc. Sounds to me like the OP is envisioning a new World order where we are moving back to that type of touring. Can't do the headliners more than a couple of times, and lines for rides that used to be 10 minutes are now 25 because guests have been re-directed elsewhere. So you will do less each day and have more non-park time or time to simply stroll. But this isn't evolution. It is devolution. Guests in 2014 will have a 1973 experience. Except at 2014 prices. I can't see how this works in a market with far more competition than Disney had in 1973.

Yep, what we are witnessing is Disney trying to go back to the days of ticket books while retaining their all-access pricing. It's all good except for that one tiny detail........

 

[FigNewton]

Just maybe FP+ will force all of us to relax and enjoy all that Disney has to offer...We have been crazy touring people in the past...wanting to get on all rides, etc, getting there at RD to experience everything...and all our kids wanted to do after a few hours in the park was to sit in the pool...

All that Disney has to offer.

Uh-huh. The only extra thing I've experienced with FP+ is extra waiting. This is not a plus.

 

[mellyf]

Can they "force" my 10 year old on Living With the Land? I've never been able to.

That's really the point. If you have very young children under 40 inches tall, or are older, no longer travel with your children, or are a childless couple on your honeymoon, I'm sure this system is wonderful for you and what you want to do. Parents of 8-13 year olds who want to ride the thrill rides over and over again are presumably less enthusiastic. My 10 year old could give a hoot about beauty and ambiance. She no longer wants to meet princesses in her new BBB gown. She wants to ride Everest and the RnR 10 times in a row. If we aren't riding anything, she's bored. I'm not forking over $5-6,000 for my kid to be bored and unhappy. Therefore, Disney isn't "forcing" me to Universal, but I'm choosing to vacation there from now on.

Hmmm...let's not judge here. My husband and I are in our 50s, no longer travel with our children, and as much as we love "taking in the atmosphere," we love the thrill rides! I'm a teacher, so we can't travel at low crowd times, so I'm a little worried. However we also are rope drop people so I'm hoping that will help. And yes, we like to ride certain rides...ToT, RnRC, EE, Soarin' etc, multiple times. Definitely not crazy about the FP+ restrictions (yes, restrictions).

 

[surferdave]

Haters just gonna hate!!

It's sad that there are people here who seem to stalk the positive FP+ threads only to argue & debate with people. There are plenty of negative FP+ threads on here so I fail to understand the bizarre need to jump on these threads & insult peoples choice to be positive. But, like I said....

Haters just gonna hate!

I just read that in the voice your avatar used on Erin Andrews, it was great.

 

[Mad Hattered]

I just read that in the voice your avatar used on Erin Andrews, it was great.

You beat me to it!

 

[cinmell]

Let's assume for a moment that FP+ is intended to get people to relax more and smell the roses. When the MK first opened, you paid around $5 to get in, you used your 7 attraction tickets, (or later 11), and your day was done. Lots of time for parades, pools, etc. Sounds to me like the OP is envisioning a new World order where we are moving back to that type of touring. Can't do the headliners more than a couple of times, and lines for rides that used to be 10 minutes are now 25 because guests have been re-directed elsewhere. So you will do less each day and have more non-park time or time to simply stroll. But this isn't evolution. It is devolution. Guests in 2014 will have a 1973 experience. Except at 2014 prices. I can't see how this works in a market with far more competition than Disney had in 1973.

Agreed.

 

[crostorfer]

haters just gonna hate!!

It's sad that there are people here who seem to stalk the positive fp+ threads only to argue & debate with people. There are plenty of negative fp+ threads on here so i fail to understand the bizarre need to jump on these threads & insult peoples choice to be positive. But, like i said....

Haters just gonna hate!

Don't you EVER talk about me! I'm the best hater in the game!

 

[rxtiger]

In full disclosure, I have not experienced FP+ yet, but I am excited about the change. Our family has experienced legacy FP from the beginning and quite honestly, for us, has needed tweaking for a while. When RD people are rushing to get to the FP line, not the ride line, something is wrong. In the beginning people used FP for what it was intended, ride one ride while waiting on another. It has become impossible to use standby lines or even get a FP for some attractions if you don't get one before noon. IMO, something needed to change. Is the new system the answer? I admittedly don't know, but I am excited about trying it.

To make the experience more enjoyable for everyone, I think a mechanism to encourage people to use the standby line (in order to evenly disperse crowds) is smart. I wish you could use FP+ at more than one park in a day, but who knows it may be smart to limit it.

Just my thoughts.

 

[crostorfer]

It has become impossible to use standby lines or even get a FP for some attractions if you don't get one before noon.

To make the experience more enjoyable for everyone, I think a mechanism to encourage people to use the standby line (in order to evenly disperse crowds) is smart. I wish you could use FP+ at more than one park in a day, but who knows it may be smart to limit it.

Just my thoughts.

I don't understand this. By forcing people to use standby, standby lines will actually be shorter? How is that possible, when they've added FP to attractions that never had it before, and the ratio that the CM's allow people on to rides is something like 8:1 in favor of the FP line?

 

[surferdave]

In the beginning people used FP for what it was intended, ride one ride while waiting on another.

Actually what it was intended for was for you to shop and dine while you waited.

 

[Laketravis]

Let's assume for a moment that FP+ is intended to get people to relax more and smell the roses. When the MK first opened, you paid around $5 to get in, you used your 7 attraction tickets, (or later 11), and your day was done. Lots of time for parades, pools, etc. Sounds to me like the OP is envisioning a new World order where we are moving back to that type of touring. Can't do the headliners more than a couple of times, and lines for rides that used to be 10 minutes are now 25 because guests have been re-directed elsewhere. So you will do less each day and have more non-park time or time to simply stroll. But this isn't evolution. It is devolution. Guests in 2014 will have a 1973 experience. Except at 2014 prices. I can't see how this works in a market with far more competition than Disney had in 1973.

Along those same lines, let's continue to assume that I go to MK/HS/EP to relax and smell the roses and put that in terms some folks might understand.

When I want to relax, I want to sit down. When I want to sit down, I look for a place to sit. When I am in MK/HS/EP, I don't see a lot of places to sit unless I'm also going to eat. When I'm wanting to relax, and I can't find a place to sit down unless I have to eat, I don't feel like I'm in the right place to relax.

 

[rxtiger]

I don't understand this. By forcing people to use standby, standby lines will actually be shorter? How is that possible, when they've added FP to attractions that never had it before, and the ratio that the CM's allow people on to rides is something like 8:1 in favor of the FP line?

Exactly, don't look at the length of the standby lines under the legacy system, rather the wait time. With all off the FP riders, the standby line didn't move. The lines will be longer now, but with a more spread crowd of FP riders hopefully resulting in faster movement. Limiting FP has great potential, let's see if that is realized.

 

[crostorfer]

Exactly, don't look at the length of the standby lines under the legacy system, rather the wait time. With all off the FP riders, the standby line didn't move. The lines will be longer now, but with a more spread crowd of FP riders hopefully resulting in faster movement. Limiting FP has great potential, let's see if that is realized.

This doesn't make any sense. The FP queue is still let on at a rate of 8:1. Unless you go during low season, and happen to be in standby during a theoretical period of time where very few people scheduled their FP+ times, having more people in standby doesn't help you at all.

 

[shalom]

But this isn't evolution. It is devolution. Guests in 2014 will have a 1973 experience. Except at 2014 prices. I can't see how this works in a market with far more competition than Disney had in 1973.

According to someone in another thread, "Limiting choices and creating an environment where everyone has the same experience is why Trader Joes and Apple are so popular. There have been books written on this. It is the new successful business plan that all businesses are trying to emulate in 2014." I haven't read the books in question, but I thought it an interesting observation.

My suspicion is that Disney believes that the people who used FP- "most efficiently" in the sense of getting multiple rides on their favorites did not spend as much as people who were less gung ho about multiple rides on the top tier. If that's the case, it's a given that Disney wants to focus on the people who spend the most, and limiting the people who used multiple fast passes on one ride means the lines will likely get shorter (since a lot of them will not wait in line for a ride they used to be able to fast pass, or at least won't be able to do it as often as they used to), which will make the higher-spending customers happier.

While I suppose it could be argued that limiting fastpasses and adding tiers is in some sense more fair (since people can no longer pull a bunch of faspasses to one ride and so newbies have a better change of getting a FP to a popular ride), I doubt very much that fairness is Disney's driving force here. If Disney thought people who pulled multiple FPs to the same ride spent more, on average, than those who didn't use the FP system, they wouldn't have set it up this way.

 

[annaaidan99]

Haters just gonna hate!! It's sad that there are people here who seem to stalk the positive FP+ threads only to argue & debate with people. There are plenty of negative FP+ threads on here so I fail to understand the bizarre need to jump on these threads & insult peoples choice to be positive. But, like I said.... Haters just gonna hate!

This! I don't know why this is happening.

 

[larryz]

This doesn't make any sense. The FP queue is still let on at a rate of 8:1. Unless you go during low season, and happen to be in standby during a theoretical period of time where very few people scheduled their FP+ times, having more people in standby doesn't help you at all.

Instead of posting wait times, they should just post the theoretical number of available stand-by line slots remaining for the day.

This is based, of course, on the widely accepted notion that each ride has a finite throughput capacity. If they've reserved X number of slots for FP+ advance reservations, and Y number of slots for FP+ day-of reservations, that will only leave Z number of slots available for stand-by guests.

Posting the number of remaining slots, and hanging a sign on the person in the last stand-by slot, will likely help more people out in planning their day as they move from ride to ride looking for their most likely ride opportunity...

 

[annaaidan99]

This doesn't make any sense. The FP queue is still let on at a rate of 8:1. Unless you go during low season, and happen to be in standby during a theoretical period of time where very few people scheduled their FP+ times, having more people in standby doesn't help you at all.

Or...if there is less FPs being distributed. If there are fewer people in FP line, standby will move quicker.

 

[rxtiger]

This doesn't make any sense. The FP queue is still let on at a rate of 8:1. Unless you go during low season, and happen to be in standby during a theoretical period of time where very few people scheduled their FP+ times, having more people in standby doesn't help you at all.

Respectfully, I disagree. We are both making assumptions here, yours being that the same total number of guests will have a FP for a particular attraction under the new system. For some rides, this may be true and the standby wait could be just a horrible as under the legacy system. My point is that by limiting the total number of FP available to a family and to a particular park, the number of FP guests for a particular attraction will be less and thus the standby line will move faster.

Again, this may not work and be a horrible failure but I do think something had to change. I know it is the America Way to not have to wait, instant gratification and all, but I am okay with a little waiting in line to experience an attraction. I still think it will be better overall once implemented. My experience with the current FP system (i.e. people running to get a FP instead of using standby or as I have also done getting a FP then getting in the standby line) has contributed to horrible wait TIMES for standby. Even it out I say.

 

[rxtiger]

Or...if there is less FPs being distributed. If there are fewer people in FP line, standby will move quicker.

 

[magicbob]

In the beginning people used FP for what it was intended, ride one ride while waiting on another.

Actually what it was intended for was for you to shop and dine while you waited.

And because people were using it to ride one ride while waiting for another instead of shopping and dining while they waited, it had to be changed in order to push people toward those latter activities instead of the former.