LOVE or HATE FP+ Anyone's mind been changed ??

[JimmyV]

It absolutely is easy to dispute. We have FP+ availability to look at. ...Based on availability alone here's my list:

A&E Meet n Greet
SDMT
FOF Parade
Wishes
SDMT
TSMM

Based on that, if I were Disney I'd be saying people want more attractions like those. Not one is a thrill ride.

Careful! You can't equate FP+ availability with popularity. Of the attractions and experiences, (I think Disney uses these two words), several have very limited FPs available for them. (A&E; FOF Parade; Wishes). The rides, (SDMT (listed twice, if I am reading it correctly) and TSMM) absolutely fit in with LT's list. And one can argue if SDMT shouldn't in fact be on the list just as BTMRR is. But as for the experiences, the limited nature of the FPs dictates the demand for them. If Disney creates an experience that allows for only 100 FPs per day and those FPs get snatched up in a nanosecond each day, that does not determine the popularity of the ride as much as it does a lower supply than demand. The number of people who greet A&E each day is much smaller than the number of people who ride Soarin'. It is easier to get a FP for Soarin'. But that doesn't mean that it loses a popularity contest. The bakery in NYC that invented the "Cronut" sells out of them each day by 8:00 a.m. Is that the "most popular pastry in America"? Or just the hardest to buy?

 

[JimmyV]

You've also basically described "Cars Land" at DLR.
A VERY successful addition to DCA.

(photo from internet search)
View attachment 79674

Thanks. I think you nailed it. I was last at DCA when Carsland was under construction, so I didn't think of that analogy. But I think you have captured exactly what we can expect from SW.

 

[JimmyV]

Is Avatar supposed to be an Avartar-themed version of Soarin'?

Trying to understand what you mean by Avatar skin and mentioning that along with Soarin'.

From "Variety Magazine"

"Bob Iger said he was recently given the chance to try out the ride, which will enable guests to fly through “Avatar’s” Pandora on the back of a flying banshee. “It felt so real, so lifelike,” Iger said of the prototype vehicle guests will board to travel through the fictional land. “There’s never been anything like it.”

The vessels that guests will ride upon will essentially be the banshees themselves, with bodies that move to mimic a breathing beast. The flying sequences will be brought to life through large video screens — similar to “Soarin'” — with vehicles moving with the 3D action inside a massive theater."

So picture a stationary vehicle shaped like a banshee instead of a hang glider. And picture Soarin' in 3-D. So...Soarin' meets Star Tours. "Never been anything like it?" Well. We'll see about that.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Nice way to try and divert what your intent was.

Etc...is not a list. You chose what attractions to list by name and they were all more of the "thrill" type genre than the ones on my list. Between the attractions you listed and the ones I listed, mine are all more popular. Why would you choose to list the less popular attractions over more popular ones ? Could it be because those are the types of attractions that fit your theory? You also said this...

"Based on recent and current conditions I think it's safe to say a very large number of paying customers would like to see more of those types of attractions."

You mean more types of etc...????? What does an etc... ride look like?

Why is admitting you're wrong so difficult?

And finally, you will concede, won't you, that none of the attractions you listed by name are as popular as the ones I listed?

I wouldn't consider space mtn to be "less popular" than a&e based on fp+ availability. It's been well documented and stated many times here that a&e has limited daily capacity compared to rides. So it doesn't take as many people to use up all of the fp+ availability for the day for a&e as it would take to use up the availability for space mtn. I think that applies to FOF and Wishes as well.

Sdmt and tsmm are the newest attractions in their respective parks, so yes they are the most popular. That, imo, doesn't mean BTMRR, Space, RNRC, TOT, etc aren't popular. The standby lines for *all* of these attractions - tsmm, sdmt, BTMRR, Everest, rnrc, tot, etc - speak to them *all* being very popular.

Eta: read it back and heading off a response I can see coming:
Yes, I do think a&e is more popular than space mtn. I'm saying that I don't think.one can look at fp+ availability for low capacity attractions and compare it to the fp+ availao for higher capacity to make that conclusion. I'm not suggesting a&e isn't more popular overall, it is, just debating what standard is used to determine that.

 

[erc]

You can count me among those who would like to see WDW charge much more for admission. There's a reason those green fees have risen as much as they have. .

Nice. Price out the little people. I bet that was Walt Disney's original dream for these parks...

 

[dayvewc]

I wouldn't consider space mtn to be "less popular" than a&e based on fp+ availability. It's been well documented and stated many times here that a&e has limited daily capacity compared to rides. So it doesn't take as many people to use up all of the fp+ availability for the day for a&e as it would take to use up the availability for space mtn. I think that applies to FOF and Wishes as well.

Sdmt and tsmm are the newest attractions in their respective parks, so yes they are the most popular. That, imo, doesn't mean BTMRR, Space, RNRC, TOT, etc aren't popular. The standby lines for *all* of these attractions - tsmm, sdmt, BTMRR, Everest, rnrc, tot, etc - speak to them *all* being very popular.

Eta: read it back and heading off a response I can see coming:
Yes, I do think a&e is more popular than space mtn. I'm saying that I don't think.one can look at fp+ availability for low capacity attractions and compare it to the fp+ availao for higher capacity to make that conclusion. I'm not suggesting a&e isn't more popular overall, it is, just debating what standard is used to determine that.

I would suggest that popularity for an attraction could be measured by maximum wait times. Since A&E regularly had 4 hour + waits, I would think it more popular than attractions that max at 2 hours. Just my $0.02.

 

[Angel Ariel]

I would suggest that popularity for an attraction could be Measured by maximum wait times. Since A&E rug,army had 4 hour + waits, I would think it more popular than attractions that max at 2 hours. Just my $0.02.

Which is why I put in the disclaimer I did I'm not in any way saying a&e isn't the most popular thing right now, it absolutely is. max wait time is,.imo, a better standard than fp+ availability.

 

[dayvewc]

Which is why I put in the disclaimer I did I'm not in any way saying a&e isn't the most popular thing right now, it absolutely is. max wait time is,.imo, a better standard than fp+ availability.

I completely agree with you. Was just trying to throw out an objective option to determine "popularity".

 

[Shaden]

But standing in line at Disney (or any theme park, for that matter) isn't a new concept. I've done it before FPs ever existed, during FP-, and now during FP+. You're GOING to stand in line for SOMETHING. If you go expecting to NEVER wait for ANYTHING, you're going to be disappointed.

And I don't think that, I know there will be lines, but FP+ has increased lines and has directed us into more lines than we used to stand in. This I am not ok with. And when people complain about lines, its not someone who is acting "Entitled" or someone saying "ME ME ME" its someone who IS entitled, because they have PAID for an experience, and if they aren't getting it, they are absolutely justified in complaining.

 

[wisblue]

From "Variety Magazine"

"Bob Iger said he was recently given the chance to try out the ride, which will enable guests to fly through “Avatar’s” Pandora on the back of a flying banshee. “It felt so real, so lifelike,” Iger said of the prototype vehicle guests will board to travel through the fictional land. “There’s never been anything like it.”

The vessels that guests will ride upon will essentially be the banshees themselves, with bodies that move to mimic a breathing beast. The flying sequences will be brought to life through large video screens — similar to “Soarin'” — with vehicles moving with the 3D action inside a massive theater."

So picture a stationary vehicle shaped like a banshee instead of a hang glider. And picture Soarin' in 3-D. So...Soarin' meets Star Tours. "Never been anything like it?" Well. We'll see about that.

When I saw the description I was thinking of something more like the Spiderman attraction at IOA than Soarin because of the uses of the words "screens" and "moving" instead of "screen" and "stationary".

I don't really set the standard at "never been anything like it", but will accept "very enjoyable and entertaining". I guess we will see whether this meets that standard.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I would suggest that popularity for an attraction could be measured by maximum wait times. Since A&E regularly had 4 hour + waits, I would think it more popular than attractions that max at 2 hours. Just my $0.02.

I am not sure you can without disregarding capacity. A& E had those waits due to limited capacity.

Even on a stage 4 closure (or however they label them), space mountain would not have a 4 hour wait. It has greater capacity.

Think of it this way--2 restaurants are very popular. One has 20 tables and one has 50 tables. They operate during the same hours and both experience table turnover at precisely the same rate to remove the variable of different lengths of time it takes to done. Neither accept reservations so as to remove that variable.

The 20 table restaurant experiences an average 2 hour wait. The 50 table restaurant experiences an average 1 hour wait.

You cannot judge the 20 table restaurant to be MORE popular while the 50 table restaurant has double the capacity. To know who is more popular, you would have to know how many guests were served.

Now of one of those restaurants was quite empty and a guest could be easily seated with no wait and see that there are many other tables around, you might be able to conclude that this restaurant is perhaps not popular.

Take Journey into Imagination. We could presume that they are very much NOT popular.

While people wait for 30 minutes to an hour or more for Test Track, all day long. One may conclude rather accurately that it is likely more popular than visiting Figment.

Just my $.02 .

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

And I don't think that, I know there will be lines, but FP+ has increased lines and has directed us into more lines than we used to stand in. This I am not ok with. And when people complain about lines, its not someone who is acting "Entitled" or someone saying "ME ME ME" its someone who IS entitled, because they have PAID for an experience, and if they aren't getting it, they are absolutely justified in complaining.

But the people you stand behind also paid for the experience. What about your ticket entitles you to not stand behind them?

And who has not been able to "get in" to a ride? FP tests do not count.

 

[Angel Ariel]

I could be wrong, but I swear in the not too distant past I have seen space have a 4 hr wait. It isn't typical by any means, but it can happen.

 

[cakebaker]

Which is why I put in the disclaimer I did I'm not in any way saying a&e isn't the most popular thing right now, it absolutely is. max wait time is,.imo, a better standard than fp+ availability.

I think what's safe to say is that claiming the rides on that list are THE most popular rides is inaccurate at the very least. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I could be wrong, but I swear in the not too distant past I have seen space have a 4 hr wait. It isn't typical by any means, but it can happen.

Christmas, perhaps?

Most I have seen is in the 2-3 hours. But even then, greater capacity so line length alone is not the best indicator to claim one thing is more popular than another is all I was getting at.

 

[wisblue]

There is another solution. One that won't result in capital expenditure, but could result in a flattening of park earnings. And that is to set the maximum attendance levels of the parks slightly lower than they are now. In other words, the levels at which they stop letting in off site guests, and then the level where they stop letting in anyone. Right now, when a park reaches critical capacity, it is uncomfortably crowded, freedom of movement is physically impaired, and people get cranky. Cranky guests are not happy guests. When the crowds at the MK grow to the point where movement around the hub requires millions of dollars of renovation, maybe it is time to address the crowding instead of the construction. If Disney cut off attendance at what Touring Plans calls an "8" crowd level day, the Magic Kingdom would not need a new hub, (which costs money); there would be less cry for additional attractions, (which cost money); less need for additional restaurants, (which cost money); and generally, happier guests. The number of days in the year that the MK sees crowd levels of "9" or "10" aren't that many, so this would actually be a very modest change. The hub renovation wasn't done because crowds in late February are unable to move. It was done because crowds on only the most crowded days of the year are unable to move. I say, address those few days, and not the infrastructure. Attendance growth is great. As long as you have places to put the people. The MK is pretty small and really wasn't built to handle 80,000 people per day. And if lowered attendance has to be met with an increase in ticket prices to fill the financial gap, so be it. People will still pay it.

I don't think there's any question that setting maximum attendance levels lower would relieve some congestion in the parks on busy days and result in slightly better FP availability and shorter standby lines. But, whether I think this would be a good idea or not, I do wonder if this "solution" would create an even bigger problem that would upset people more than the one you are trying to solve.

If Disney started cutting off attendance at lower levels you might be reaching closures on 10-20% of all park days and there would be a lot of other days on which closures would be a possibility. Someone visiting during spring break or over the summer wouldn't know for sure if they would be able to enter the MK or any other park that reached the closure point.

I don't think people would be happy if they planned their trip to the Orlando area and, upon arrival at a park, found that they were going to be turned away. It's one thing for those closures to happen for a couple of hours on a small handful of the busiest days of the year, but something else again for it to happen on several dozen days and be a threat on many others.

A way to avoid this disappointment might be to allow guests who buy park tickets to also designate certain days on which they will visit certain parks, guaranteeing their entrance to that park that day. While that might be OK for some people, others who are already upset about lack of spontaneity at WDW would presumably hate this even more.

 

[JimmyV]

A way to avoid this disappointment might be to allow guests who buy park tickets to also designate certain days on which they will visit certain parks, guaranteeing their entrance to that park that day.

This could certainly be done. But it could also be done in conjunction with FP booking. Booking a FP guarantees admission. Disney already has some idea as to what attendance will be. That was one of the reasons for implementing FP+ in the first place. Again, we're not talking about rolling back attendance as much as we are trying to keep it where it is. WDW was plenty crowded in 2011, 2012 and 2013. If they set those numbers as targets, people would only get turned away on rare occasions. The hub didn't need to be rebuilt in 2011. If we could keep attendance at that level, then money wouldn't have to be spent adjusting to a crowd that is frankly too big for the park. Then, money could be re-directed to other worthy areas.

I do wonder if this "solution" would create any even bigger problem that would upset people more than the one you are trying to solve.

It would be an interesting case study. Put 100K people in the park and what percentage of them do you anger? Keep 7% of prospective guests out of the park on a particular day, and you anger 7% of potential guests, but you make the rest happy. Assume that you have 10 people in a room enjoying a buffet. 2 more people want to join them. The host tells the 10 that 2 more people want to get in, and if they are let in, certain food items will run out and the room will get hot and crowded. The 10 resist. If the host lets the 2 in, then 10 people are angry. If the host keeps the 2 out, 2 people are angry. I don't pretend to know where the balance lies. But it would be a very interesting thing to study.

 

[flicx]

Nice. Price out the little people. I bet that was Walt Disney's original dream for these parks...

I can agree with you on this. It is a shame. Disney world is fast becoming a country club.

 

[flicx]

It's still 10x the cost it was in 1970, even being 1/2 the cost at its peak. This chart stops at 2011. You have to envision the subsequent rise to $4.50 and new fall to $2.50. Disney tickets have gone up by about the same 10x in the same time. Really up until this latest fall from its peak for gas, Disney prices increases had actually been less than gas. Interesting. I would not have thought that.

That is indeed interesting. The one thing I haven't seen from Disney yet is a price decrease on ticket prices. Even in lean times. Increases are understandable in good times but come on every year?

 

[wisblue]

I would love to see something similar to Cars Land at DHS. We experienced that in December and it is an extremely fun area with one exceptionally good ride, two lesser rides, some places to eat, and overall great theming that makes it fun to be around. I think it compares very favorably with the Harry Potter areas at Universal, with the additional advantage that the signature attraction is even more family friendly.

I expect that whatever is planned for DHS will be on this scale, and will be very disappointed if it isn't. But, I think it is unrealistic to think that an area like this is going to resolve, or even significantly alleviate, the current complaints about FP+ availability and standby lines. If an area like this were to open, I would expect it to be a major draw for DHS. The main attraction would likely be subjected to a demand comparable to the one that is still there for RSR. And, the additional guests drawn to DHS are not all going to spend their whole day in the new area. They are also going to want to experience some or all of TSMM, RNRC, and TOT. Guests who are unhappy now because they can't do TSMM, RNRC, and TOT 2 or 3 times each in a day , and have very little interest in the rest of the attractions at DHS, aren't going to be that much happier if they get one ride on that major new attraction but still can't get multiple FPs for it or any of the other old favorites. Increasing the capacity at TSMM will help some.

The bottom line here for me is that there is no simple solution to dealing with the crowd issue at WDW. As long as people expect or demand FPs for all of the major attractions and short standby lines for everything else, they are going to be disappointed on all but the least crowded days. Not to mention that adding more attractions is only a future solution that does nothing to address the issues that exist today.