kides say Magic Bands have ruined Disney

[Brian Noble]

FP+ was not implemented to benefit the super-users, but to "thwart" them. If the super users of FP- don't like FP+ then it's doing what Disney intended for it to do.

It's worth thinking about why this is Disney's intention.

Take Epcot, for example. Soarin' has an operational hourly capacity of about 1440 guests per hour, or a daily capacity of 17,280 in Epcot's typical 9A-9P day. Test Track is a little lower, at 1080 hourly or 12,960 in a day.
(Source: https://crooksinwdw.wordpress.com/tag/thrc/)

Epcot's annual attendance in 2013 was about 11,229,000. (source: http://www.aecom.com/deployedfiles/...conomics/_documents/ThemeMuseumIndex_2013.pdf) So, on an "average" day in Epcot, more than 30,700 people enter the gates. But, Soarin' and Test Track together can only give out 30,240 rides in total.

For every old-school FP-runner who got two rides on each for their family, there were three other families that could not ride either one. So, it becomes pretty obvious why FP+ reservations are tiered in Epcot---there simply isn't enough capacity to let everyone ride both. It's one or the other. And, Disney has decided they'd like to give more or less everyone a chance to ride one or the other, rather than let a small number of guests ride both several times.

Things might change a little if the rumored "third theater" opens for Soarin', but until then---this is just how the math works.

 

[awilliams4]

Yes, I did. Only to express my disdain for you and your comment.

 

[JennaDeeDooDah]

It's worth thinking about why this is Disney's intention.

Take Epcot, for example. Soarin' has an operational hourly capacity of about 1440 guests per hour, or a daily capacity of 17,280 in Epcot's typical 9A-9P day. Test Track is a little lower, at 1080 hourly or 12,960 in a day.
(Source: https://crooksinwdw.wordpress.com/tag/thrc/)

Epcot's annual attendance in 2013 was about 11,229,000. (source: http://www.aecom.com/deployedfiles/...conomics/_documents/ThemeMuseumIndex_2013.pdf) So, on an "average" day in Epcot, more than 30,700 people enter the gates. But, Soarin' and Test Track together can only give out 30,240 rides in total.

For every old-school FP-runner who got two rides on each for their family, there were three other families that could not ride either one. So, it becomes pretty obvious why FP+ reservations are tiered in Epcot---there simply isn't enough capacity to let everyone ride both. It's one or the other. And, Disney has decided they'd like to give more or less everyone a chance to ride one or the other, rather than let a small number of guests ride both several times.

Things might change a little if the rumored "third theater" opens for Soarin', but until then---this is just how the math works.

I'm more than happy to give someone my Test Track spot if they will give me their Soarin' spot in return.

 

[redsbe]

As veterans of 15+ WDW/DL trips, including most recently Dec12-18, we found that the crowds were the biggest issue and need for planning rather then just FP+ alone. Even before FP+ we found ourselves having to plan days due to crowds, events and reservations and make use of EMHs or RD to be able to experience and enjoy the visits, while also avoiding going during peak crowds and lines. With those trips since 1995, crowds and rising costs have been the most significant changes we have noted and having to increase our planning so as to be effective and enjoy/see all that we wanted. And our kids were able to each experience WDW/DL 5x times between the ages of 5 and 12, and once past that age and number of trips their interest declined as well. Even not considering FP+, I am not sure it is possible to visit WDW during most times of the year without some level of daily planning needed. The days of simply going to WDW and dropping in to any park on any day/time are for the most park simply gone as there are too many people, events, differing park hours, and daily activities to keep most park days simple and easy to experience without the risk of running into crowds and delays, especially if your trip is limited to less then a week or one trip a year to WDW.

 

[mom2rtk]

I'm more than happy to give someone my Test Track spot if they will give me their Soarin' spot in return.

And that's one of the problems with FP+. It's sort of a "one size fits all" deal. I would likely trade my TSMM for someone's RSR. Oh wait.... can't do that either.

 

[Brian Noble]

I would likely trade my TSMM for someone's RSR. Oh wait.... can't do that either.

For the most part, the math in the Studios works out the same way as it does for Epcot, though the difference is that there isn't universal demand. So, you can't start everyone with spots for *both* TSMM and RSR. You have to pick one or the other if you want to give every guest a chance at something.

As an aside, if what you want is lots of RSR rides, go to Universal, stay in one of the Unlimited Express resorts, and ride Hulk over and over instead. It's a much better ride!

 

[Mambo Junkie]

There are some differences, because the advantages to the "advance planner" under FP+ are not as stark as the advantages offered to the wily FP runner of old. Advance planners still can't prebook more than 3/day, they still can't prebook two experiences on a single attraction, and they are still subject to the tiering rules in Epcot and Studios. So, at least in those senses, FP+ is more equitable.

Furthermore, I don't think "no advance planning" at 5 days is quite accurate---to get anywhere near the maximum benefit from old-style FP running, you had to do a good bit of study at some point. Veterans could amortize that over many visits because the rules changed infrequently, but a newbie with no advance planning as of 5 days of their visit was at a disadvantage in either system.

On the other hand, if you are willing to do *something* as late as 5 days out, FP+ is still useful. As I type this, the EasyWDW "least recommended park" five days hence is Magic Kingdom. I can book FP+ for a party of two for any operating FP+ attraction in MK except MSEP, A&E, 7DMT, and Wishes. That's not terrible.

That said, I do agree with you that FP+ is designed to favor advance planners. Indeed, I suspect the decision to favor advance planners is another very conscious one on Disney's part. Over a decade ago, Disney leadership gave a presentation to a bunch of stock analysts. Here's one of the things they said:



Mind you, this was BEFORE Magic Your Way, the Dining Plan, Magical Express, etc. were deployed, let alone FP+, Photopass/Memory Maker, etc. If you think about it, nearly every innovation Disney has come up with in the past decade has been to encourage guests to plan things in advance, and to lock as much of that planned time to Disney as possible.

So, yes, the system favors (i.e. encourages) advance planning, because those who plan in advance are more profitable.


Yep. And Disney's bet---and it's an all-in, multi-billion dollar bet---is that the number of angry/sad people will be vastly outweighed by the increase in satisfaction that the casual guest gets from prebooking, and the increase in vacation time/dollars captured by encouraging more and more people to plan a little something in advance. It's hard to say that would be true only reading the DISboards, but the DIS is not at all representative of the average WDW guest.

I had read an article about this, how the new system was structured to keep the dollars in Disney, and for the better part, they have been successful. As I said in previous posts, we were hard pressed to find time away from the parks, between the ADRs and fps. We are not rope drop people and enjoy getting to the parks late, but had no time to either go elsewhere or even leave the park and come back. That is, until (as I have previously stated) we dropped all of our ADRs and fps. Then we were able to visit another park and have down time without feeling like we were losing out on something. I think it creates a state of mind "must do". I know nobody is holding a gun to my head to keep the ADRs and fps, but when you devote so much time to getting everything "perfect" you just follow the plans. Until you realize it doesn't fit your touring style and say "Lose the plans!" Everybody in my party was complaining anyway, lol.

 

[JennaDeeDooDah]

And that's one of the problems with FP+. It's sort of a "one size fits all" deal. I would likely trade my TSMM for someone's RSR. Oh wait.... can't do that either.

I'd do the same.

 

[BugsDaddy]

I personally think that threads like this don't hold much purpose except to excite the different pro FP+ and anti FP+ groups that always post on these type of threads. Just an excuse to argue over something that isn't going away.

FP+ certainly does not seem to be having a negative affect on park attendance which is the only thing that Disney is looking at in the long run. And that is what they should be looking at. If changes are made which do not seem to have a negligible impact on customer experience (based on attendance) and those changes increase their revenue per guest, it really is their obligation to their stockholders to do so.

Almost any change will affect someone or a specific group of people in a negative way. Either those people are in such large numbers that they can drive a negative financial impact to the company, forcing change. Or they are in the vast minority and will need to adapt. We will see what happens in this case, but so far all indications are that FP+ will probably be expanded to other Disney parks.

 

[mom2rtk]

For the most part, the math in the Studios works out the same way as it does for Epcot, though the difference is that there isn't universal demand. So, you can't start everyone with spots for *both* TSMM and RSR. You have to pick one or the other if you want to give every guest a chance at something.

As an aside, if what you want is lots of RSR rides, go to Universal, stay in one of the Unlimited Express resorts, and ride Hulk over and over instead. It's a much better ride!

If they were trying to make the math work better, then removing the stipulation that you had to be in the park to access the FPs was not the way to go. It made things worse in that regard, not better.

All it did was move the rope drop from park opening to 60 days prior and added a lot more bodies to the mix.

 

[Shaden]

Why do I have to defend myself to you?

I don't know, ask yourself, you replied.

Troller trolls, gets a bite, and trolls the responder again. Classic.

 

[Love Tink]

I personally think that threads like this don't hold much purpose except to excite the different pro FP+ and anti FP+ groups that always post on these type of threads. Just an excuse to argue over something that isn't going away.

FP+ certainly does not seem to be having a negative affect on park attendance which is the only thing that Disney is looking at in the long run. And that is what they should be looking at. If changes are made which do not seem to have a negligible impact on customer experience (based on attendance) and those changes increase their revenue per guest, it really is their obligation to their stockholders to do so.
Almost any change will affect someone or a specific group of people in a negative way. Either those people are in such large numbers that they can drive a negative financial impact to the company, forcing change. Or they are in the vast minority and will need to adapt. We will see what happens in this case, but so far all indications are that FP+ will probably be expanded to other Disney parks.

I never understand this point of view - which crops up here quite often - that Disney's only responsibility is to make more money for its stockholders.

Corporations have responsibility to more than their stockholders. They have a responsibility to the people who purchase their product.

Do you disagree? Well, that means you would be okay with a company selling moldy bread or clothes that fall apart after one washing, or that advertises being open from 8-5 and closes at 2. Otherwise you're a hypocrite.

Disney has a responsibility to do more than wring every dollar they can out of their visitors. It's fair to argue about how far they have to go, or how much they have to provide, to fulfill the contract inherent in their advertising. But to simply absolve them of any responsibility to anyone who doesn't own their stock is absurd.

 

[Shaden]

It's worth thinking about why this is Disney's intention.

Take Epcot, for example. Soarin' has an operational hourly capacity of about 1440 guests per hour, or a daily capacity of 17,280 in Epcot's typical 9A-9P day. Test Track is a little lower, at 1080 hourly or 12,960 in a day.
(Source: https://crooksinwdw.wordpress.com/tag/thrc/)

Epcot's annual attendance in 2013 was about 11,229,000. (source: http://www.aecom.com/deployedfiles/...conomics/_documents/ThemeMuseumIndex_2013.pdf) So, on an "average" day in Epcot, more than 30,700 people enter the gates. But, Soarin' and Test Track together can only give out 30,240 rides in total.

For every old-school FP-runner who got two rides on each for their family, there were three other families that could not ride either one. So, it becomes pretty obvious why FP+ reservations are tiered in Epcot---there simply isn't enough capacity to let everyone ride both. It's one or the other. And, Disney has decided they'd like to give more or less everyone a chance to ride one or the other, rather than let a small number of guests ride both several times.

Things might change a little if the rumored "third theater" opens for Soarin', but until then---this is just how the math works.

And this is why people have pointed to the expenditure on FP+ as a major misstep by wdw.

Two key elements of the system are crowd management and locking guests in.

So if the system works and makes you feel locked in but limits the rides you do ... as reported by the OP ... how is anyone surprised when they aren't happy ???

Now people will point to other things wdw is spending money on to add attractions, and in the next couple years maybe that will pan out. Of course for a bunch of those "new" things we have to remember they closed other things first, so capacity isn't necessarily increased.

But Wdw if they were first and foremost concerned about guest enjoyment and making sure there were attractions for everyone could have launched a massive attraction building campaign first ... then looked at FP after instead of trying to stretch the few attractions they have in some parks over everyone more "evenly".

 

[Suvadoo]

I personally think that threads like this don't hold much purpose except to excite the different pro FP+ and anti FP+ groups that always post on these type of threads. Just an excuse to argue over something that isn't going away.

FP+ certainly does not seem to be having a negative affect on park attendance which is the only thing that Disney is looking at in the long run. And that is what they should be looking at. If changes are made which do not seem to have a negligible impact on customer experience (based on attendance) and those changes increase their revenue per guest, it really is their obligation to their stockholders to do so.
Almost any change will affect someone or a specific group of people in a negative way. Either those people are in such large numbers that they can drive a negative financial impact to the company, forcing change. Or they are in the vast minority and will need to adapt. We will see what happens in this case, but so far all indications are that FP+ will probably be expanded to other Disney parks.

I think it's really too early to tell what kind of effects this will have long term. We shall see...

 

[mom2rtk]

And this is why people have pointed to the expenditure on FP+ as a major misstep by wdw.

Two key elements of the system are crowd management and locking guests in.

So if the system works and makes you feel locked in but limits the rides you do ... as reported by the OP ... how is anyone surprised when they aren't happy ???

Now people will point to other things wdw is spending money on to add attractions, and in the next couple years maybe that will pan out. Of course for a bunch of those "new" things we have to remember they closed other things first, so capacity isn't necessarily increased.

But Wdw if they were first and foremost concerned about guest enjoyment and making sure there were attractions for everyone could have launched a massive attraction building campaign first ... then looked at FP after instead of trying to stretch the few attractions they have in some parks over everyone more "evenly".

FP+ really highlighted the capacity issues in the parks when I think they hoped it would mask them.

 

[Suvadoo]

I never understand this point of view - which crops up here quite often - that Disney's only responsibility is to make more money for its stockholders.

Corporations have responsibility to more than their stockholders. They have a responsibility to the people who purchase their product.

Do you disagree? Well, that means you would be okay with a company selling moldy bread or clothes that fall apart after one washing, or that advertises being open from 8-5 and closes at 2. Otherwise you're a hypocrite.

Disney has a responsibility to do more than wring every dollar they can out of their visitors. It's fair to argue about how far they have to go, or how much they have to provide, to fulfill the contract inherent in their advertising. But to simply absolve them of any responsibility to anyone who doesn't own their stock is absurd.

Well said!!

 

[Mambo Junkie]

And this is why people have pointed to the expenditure on FP+ as a major misstep by wdw.

Two key elements of the system are crowd management and locking guests in.

So if the system works and makes you feel locked in but limits the rides you do ... as reported by the OP ... how is anyone surprised when they aren't happy ???

Now people will point to other things wdw is spending money on to add attractions, and in the next couple years maybe that will pan out. Of course for a bunch of those "new" things we have to remember they closed other things first, so capacity isn't necessarily increased.

But Wdw if they were first and foremost concerned about guest enjoyment and making sure there were attractions for everyone could have launched a massive attraction building campaign first ... then looked at FP after instead of trying to stretch the few attractions they have in some parks over everyone more "evenly".

Well said!

 

[momof2n2]

And this is why people have pointed to the expenditure on FP+ as a major misstep by wdw.

Two key elements of the system are crowd management and locking guests in.

So if the system works and makes you feel locked in but limits the rides you do ... as reported by the OP ... how is anyone surprised when they aren't happy ???

Now people will point to other things wdw is spending money on to add attractions, and in the next couple years maybe that will pan out. Of course for a bunch of those "new" things we have to remember they closed other things first, so capacity isn't necessarily increased.

But Wdw if they were first and foremost concerned about guest enjoyment and making sure there were attractions for everyone could have launched a massive attraction building campaign first ... then looked at FP after instead of trying to stretch the few attractions they have in some parks over everyone more "evenly".

I agree.
And even though Kool-Aid drinkers will scold me, I'm going to add my 2¢.

I think the only thing WDW execs. really accomplished was that they got to use their fun, new technology a new way. I don't think there will be any special decline or growth based on the FP+-lock-them-in piece.

We all know those families that only do WDW once in a lifetime. I have dozens of friends in this category. They wait until Jason and Jennifer (or Aiden and Emily) are 6 & 8 and they drop in on their local travel agent and book "the big one".

Now - two years back that family may have only done some cursory research, and came home not riding TSMM. Yeah - they may have been a little bummed, but they had fun. Dad shook his head at how much they spent, but Mom made scrap book and the kids got their ears. They are never going back but it isn't because they didn't ride TSMM. They are never going back because they never planned to go back.

This year, another family spun down for the big trip. They got the email reminding them to make their FP reservations and did so. They went. They rode TSMM. They had a fun trip. Dad still can't believe what it cost. Mom made her scrapbook. Kids got ears. They aren't going back either. Locking in that ride didn't make a hoot of difference.

Now - I'll also concede that the less than 1% of us former superusers who aren't going back aren't going to make a hoot of difference either.

I propose that none of this FP+ stuff is going to have any net change in the bottom line.

Yes - they will post making more money - because stuff cost more.
Yes - they will post higher attendance - but so will all the other local parks. The economy is travel friendly.

In the end - they had something new to use. I contend they still could have used the technology with the old style set up. Walk to the ride after you are in the pack to secure your FP. Hand out "rewards" the old-fashioned way.

 

[Hooked On The Mouse]

I can speak for me: Last chance is this April, but for the first time I will divide my time between WDW and Universal. First half WDW. We're not super users and there are only a couple of rides that our family would repeat, but I don't want to adhere to a schedule while I'm at WDW. On our last trip, I found myself constantly checking my device to make sure we didn't miss a FP+ reservation, instead of paying attention to the rich details that are everywhere in any Disney park. To me, it was a waste.
If the trip in April is a similar experience, it will be our last trip to WDW. We will continue to get our Disney fix at DLR. And if, God Forbid, FP+ comes to DLR , I guess it will be time for me to hang up my mouse ears and search out different vacation destinations. That would be very hard to do, since my Disney dreaming gets me through most of life's rough spots.

I can understand this. After our first fp+ experience I didn't want to go back, but our family has loved our time in WDW so much that we agreed on another trip to see how it goes, and we have picked a time with the lowest possible crowd calendar scores. We are also finding the last couple of trips that we are enjoying Universal and Universal resorts more and more bc of lower crowds and imaginative innovative rides, although I know that is not ok to say here. I guess I have an underlying sadness to maybe have to say goodbye to WDW, which we enjoyed so much in the past. It is just too much money to spend if we are not going to get as much out of it anymore.

 

[redsbe]

I agree.
And even though Kool-Aid drinkers will scold me, I'm going to add my 2¢.

I think the only thing WDW execs. really accomplished was that they got to use their fun, new technology a new way. I don't think there will be any special decline or growth based on the FP+-lock-them-in piece.

We all know those families that only do WDW once in a lifetime. I have dozens of friends in this category. They wait until Jason and Jennifer (or Aiden and Emily) are 6 & 8 and they drop in on their local travel agent and book "the big one".

Now - two years back that family may have only done some cursory research, and came home not riding TSMM. Yeah - they may have been a little bummed, but they had fun. Dad shook his head at how much they spent, but Mom made scrap book and the kids got their ears. They are never going back but it isn't because they didn't ride TSMM. They are never going back because they never planned to go back.

This year, another family spun down for the big trip. They got the email reminding them to make their FP reservations and did so. They went. They rode TSMM. They had a fun trip. Dad still can't believe what it cost. Mom made her scrapbook. Kids got ears. They aren't going back either. Locking in that ride didn't make a hoot of difference.

Now - I'll also concede that the less than 1% of us former superusers who aren't going back aren't going to make a hoot of difference either.

I propose that none of this FP+ stuff is going to have any net change in the bottom line.

Yes - they will post making more money - because stuff cost more.
Yes - they will post higher attendance - but so will all the other local parks. The economy is travel friendly.

In the end - they had something new to use. I contend they still could have used the technology with the old style set up. Walk to the ride after you are in the pack to secure your FP. Hand out "rewards" the old-fashioned way.

The approach WDW has taken, right or wrong, is allow park visitors to lock in and assure access to three rides/attractions before they arrive, without the worry of regardless what day, time or crowd level, then can be assured times to walk onto those three rides/attractions. Simply taking the approach to decide the day of, and at any time of the day, to walk into a park and expect to get on any attraction with little or no wait is not possible now most times of the year due to increasing crowds. WDW view was to assist visitors, especially new ones, to ensure them that even with high cost and increasing crowds they could lock in at least 3 attractions. And frankly also keep them in the park longer each day and spending more money. I am not saying I agree with this approach, but can see how from the view of WDW and many visitors how FP+ could be appealing so as not to worry about missing the 3 rides/attractions they really what to experience. The reality today with crowd levels most times of the year being able to simply show up any day and at any time and not have a long wait for TSM, Soaring, 7DMm (or expect under previous FP system to secure a FP) is not possible. Ultimately the long term solution is to add attractions and increase capacity but until then managing crowds and demand requires other means.