My 2 cents on FP+

[JimmyV]

They tried that card / reservation system for a while, that didn't work. It was essentially an off-grid FP-.

1. I don't recall that, but I trust that you are correct.
2. Handing out cards can't really be a fair comparison to having multiple machines where the return time is clearly noted before you choose to act.
3. Bottom line...a character meet and greet cannot possible process the same number of people per hour as an attraction, so there can never be a fair comparison between how FPs are allocated for A&E as compared to how they are allocated for RnR as an example. The commodity is too limited, and the crowds are too big. I don't know if there can ever be a better system until they have 20 pairs of A&E scattered around the four parks.

 

[MrInfinity]

So you think it's fair that someone could log in at midnight 60 days out, and not get any availability for SDMT, but someone could book a last minute trip and randomly check MDE the day before and get SDMT?

I don't call that fair. I call that a crapshoot.

So in all "fairness" How would you divide them up? All other rides aside, cuz let's face it, the SDMT is new and the hot ticket. Say there are 60,000 guests. Of those, 50,000 want to ride the SDMT, 10,000 don't care to. The ride handles 20,000 riders in a day (guessing). How would you divide them up?

FP-: He who gets there the earliest gets one. If you're there early enough before other guests even get there, you can get two.
FP+: Priority is given to those staying onsite (and among those, the guests staying longer). If you're staying onsite (around half of those guests) then you are pretty sure to get one. If you're staying off-site, it's a crapshoot as you put it.

That's what Disney has chosen. Pretty sure to get one if staying onsite, and a crapshoot if you're not. That sounds pretty reasonable to me.

What, if anything, would you do differently? Which 30,000 guests would you choose to not get one?

 

[Robo]

Build.

More.

Attractions.

 

[tlmadden73]

I'm curious. Do you honestly think that people believe they can't ride something if they can't get a FP?

Not in general. But the way some people react (here on the forums) about "not getting a fast pass for ride x" it makes me feel that some people do think that.

 

[bpadair32]

That's fine, but I don't think those early FP- threads were completely unbiased. I vaguely recall questioning that "10%" number in a post long ago and being chastised, not interested in going down that road again. I also asked how "success" is defined. You say 10% used FP- "extensively". But then claim 95% have success with FP+ most of the time, I don't know what success means, it seems like you're comparing apples to oranges. Certainly 95% of guests are not using FP+ extensively.

And I think the point is moot anyway, whether FP- or FP+ was/is a success to an individual person or family is going to depend on that individual, what they like to see/do and how they like to do it, and if they are getting more or less done with FP+ compared to FP-. And whether FP+ is a success to Disney as a corporation isn't based on utilization, it's going to be based on revenue/attendance.

The way it has been marketed, discussed, etc. I would imagine a very high percentage do use it. Maybe not 95% but I would bet a large sum of money that it is used by a much higher percentage of guests than the old system was.

 

[JimmyV]

There is no goal to make a success rate of 100% for a small subset of guests

I think you are overlooking the fact that there are two different sets of goals at play: that of the system creator and that of the system user. I think you are focusing only on the former. As a user, I absolutely see the value in achieving a 100% success rate for a small subset of guests, as I am willing to exert the effort to be among that crowd. That makes me a Machiavellian Disney Guest, and I don't really have a problem with that. Before, I got FPs for all the tiered rides. Now, I have to choose. As Mr. Pareto pointed out, it is not irrational for me to be disappointed in this reallocation, as it does not favour me.

 

[bpadair32]

I think you are overlooking the fact that there are two different sets of goals at play: that of the system creator and that of the system user. I think you are focusing only on the former. As a user, I absolutely see the value in achieving a 100% success rate for a small subset of guests, as I am willing to exert the effort to be among that crowd. That makes me a Machiavellian Disney Guest, and I don't really have a problem with that. Before, I got FPs for all the tiered rides. Now, I have to choose. As Mr. Pareto pointed out, it is not irrational for me to be disappointed in this reallocation, as it does not favour me.

I am just going to say that I don't think Machiavelli is someone people should aspire to be.

 

[MrInfinity]

1. I don't recall that, but I trust that you are correct.
2. Handing out cards can't really be a fair comparison to having multiple machines where the return time is clearly noted before you choose to act.
3. Bottom line...a character meet and greet cannot possible process the same number of people per hour as an attraction, so there can never be a fair comparison between how FPs are allocated for A&E as compared to how they are allocated for RnR as an example. The commodity is too limited, and the crowds are too big. I don't know if there can ever be a better system until they have 20 pairs of A&E scattered around the four parks.

I agree w you here, A&E is not really relevant in the big picture. Its capacity is so extremely low that no system can possibly get everyone to see them. With only 2,000 or so people getting to see them in a day, obviously 58,000 out of 60,000 guests will not get to see them. If you make this a card / FP- / rope drop race, it's going to be a madhouse with people getting hurt to be first. If you make it an online thing, people with the most advantage will book them up w/in minutes of them going online. This is the same with ALL hard-to-get ticket events. I think what Disney has done is the best they can do. They made A&E first available to people staying onsite, for longer stays.

 

[Lucius Best]

You seem like a good person to pick their brain on the new system. I could never be as detailed as you but we are thinking of traveling during second highest peak week, so I may need to try. So may I ask when did you plan your fast passes for ? morning/mid afternoon/ evening. I plan on trying the rope drop thing for the first time ever and was unsure when to look to book the fast passes for. I think rope drop is 7am that week but was wondering if we should book for evening or book early in am and take chances on the SDFP?

Not directed at me, but I will chime in. There are lots of different options, it depends on your family makeup, ages of children, morning or evening people, will you have park hoppers, taking afternoon breaks, staying late, etc.

Personally I'm a morning person, if I was going during a really busy week like around Christmas, I'd be at rope drop every day. I'd probably book my FP+ for morning because lines will definitely be long by 11am, and to maintain the possibility of getting additional FP at kiosks (depending on the park) but wouldn't count on it. I'd likely take more afternoon breaks than I would on an off-season trip, and go back to the parks in the evening. There are other people who take the opposite strategy. They sleep late, hang out by the pool, then head to the parks with their 3 FP+ reserved later in the day, and stay until the park closes. Another popular option is to hit one park at rope drop early, and then when it gets busy park hop to another less-busy park where you have your 3 FP+ reserved.

 

[MrInfinity]

That's fine, but I don't think those early FP- threads were completely unbiased. I vaguely recall questioning that "10%" number in a post long ago and being chastised, not interested in going down that road again. I also asked how "success" is defined. You say 10% used FP- "extensively". But then claim 95% have success with FP+ most of the time, I don't know what success means, it seems like you're comparing apples to oranges. Certainly 95% of guests are not using FP+ extensively.

And I think the point is moot anyway, whether FP- or FP+ was/is a success to an individual person or family is going to depend on that individual, what they like to see/do and how they like to do it, and if they are getting more or less done with FP+ compared to FP-. And whether FP+ is a success to Disney as a corporation isn't based on utilization, it's going to be based on revenue/attendance.

Jimmy threw out the 95%, not me. I was paraphrasing him. The context he used was along the lines of 95% of guests staying on-site are successful at getting an SDMT FP+. I agreed w that %, so I went w it.

 

[Lucius Best]

The way it has been marketed, discussed, etc. I would imagine a very high percentage do use it. Maybe not 95% but I would bet a large sum of money that it is used by a much higher percentage of guests than the old system was.

Well, no one is going to take you up on that bet, all you have to do is look at the length of the FP return lines and you can see that more people are using FP+ system.

 

[MrInfinity]

I think you are overlooking the fact that there are two different sets of goals at play: that of the system creator and that of the system user. I think you are focusing only on the former. As a user, I absolutely see the value in achieving a 100% success rate for a small subset of guests, as I am willing to exert the effort to be among that crowd. That makes me a Machiavellian Disney Guest, and I don't really have a problem with that. Before, I got FPs for all the tiered rides. Now, I have to choose. As Mr. Pareto pointed out, it is not irrational for me to be disappointed in this reallocation, as it does not favour me.

Jimmy I have never stated that FP- was not better for that 10% of guests (myself included) who used FP-. We got multiple tickets to multiple great rides, all day long! We lived it, loved it, have the T-shirt. But when I talk about whether a system is better or worse, I look at not just how well it served me, or how I knew the weaknesses of the old system so I could use it more optimally... but how it serves the bulk of guests. FP+ simply serves more guests, some, by serving those few guests who used to get more, less.

I don't think we disagree in our understanding of how the system works. I just think it's the right thing to do, for Disney to make it harder for me to get so many passes, so that all their other guests can get some. You seem to think that you don't care that others are getting less, if you can get more. I kind of do that too, yet I see it as a constantly evolving challenge. On Disney, it's up to them to find ways to keep me from getting more than my share. FP+ is one for them. On me, it's my challenge to continue to find ways to beat the newest and best system to get more for my family. FP+ is harder to beat, but not impossible!

Despite the fact that I'd get more FPs under FP-, I really appreciate that under FP+ my fewer FP+'s are better. e.g. I'm sitting on 3x SDMT, A&E, PP, TSMM, 2x TT, etc, all before my trip even starts! That is some insanely awesome benefit. Those are far and away the longest lines we'll encounter, and we can set up multiples of them ahead of time. I don't only use them on headliners either, for I've also got FP+'s to Pirates, Figment, and the Haunted Mansion, despite some people thinking those are terrible choices. They're what we love to do. FP+ really has some very nice benefits that have exceeded the loss of getting more, before.

 

[Lucius Best]

Jimmy threw out the 95%, not me. I was paraphrasing him. The context he used was along the lines of 95% of guests staying on-site are successful at getting an SDMT FP+. I agreed w that %, so I went w it.

Okay, but I still don't understand, it seems like you're comparing apples to oranges. For FP- you say 10% of all Disney guests were using it "extensively" and for some reason, only they had success with the FP- system. I don't understand the point of using that number in context with the 95% of on-site guests who are able to get 7DMT. You're leaving out offsite guests, and guests who don't want 7DMT, and guests who aren't using FP+.

 

[JimmyV]

You seem to think that you don't care that others are getting less, if you can get more. I kind of do that too, yet I see it as a constantly evolving challenge. On Disney, it's up to them to find ways to keep me from getting more than my share.

You've hit the nail on the head here. But the issue/problem is that no one can ever agree on the pure definition of "my share". Since there are no rules printed on the back of the admission ticket that says that each guest is entitled to one, and only one FP for a particular attraction, then we are all left with our own rules as to what is, or is not, "your share". Is it each according to his ability, or each according to his need? Under a capitalist view, it is one way, and under a Marxist view, it is another. You have to admit that the artificially imposed equitable distribution of FPs runs counter to the way most every good, service and commodity is distributed in this country. That doesn't make it wrong, per se, but it sure does make it unfamiliar. What you have zeroed in on is the fact that under the right circumstances, Marxist-styled equality overseen by the entity in power can be good and can be efficient. But telling a bunch of capitalists spending their hard-earned dollars on vacation that they have to submit to Marxist equality can be a tough sell!

 

[MrInfinity]

You've hit the nail on the head here. But the issue/problem is that no one can ever agree on the pure definition of "my share". Since there are no rules printed on the back of the admission ticket that says that each guest is entitled to one, and only one FP for a particular attraction, then we are all left with our own rules as to what is, or is not, "your share". Is it each according to his ability, or each according to his need? Under a capitalist view, it is one way, and under a Marxist view, it is another. You have to admit that the artificially imposed equitable distribution of FPs runs counter to the way most every good, service and commodity is distributed in this country. That doesn't make it wrong, per se, but it sure does make it unfamiliar. What you have zeroed in on is the fact that under the right circumstances, Marxist-styled equality overseen by the entity in power can be good and can be efficient. But telling a bunch of capitalists spending their hard-earned dollars on vacation that they have to submit to Marxist equality can be a tough sell!

I think the definition of "my share" becomes official from the offering of someone with something to sell, and the acceptance of one who buys it. If you buy what's for sale, you've accepted the share that was offered. In this case, it's one FastPass to a headliner per day.

It is not each according to his ability, as in Disney sells admission, and then those who are more able take more. Nor is it by need, as in those who cannot fend for themselves are handed to from those who earned more. It's in between. Disney wants to accommodate as many guests as possible. That is it right there! Under FP-, a few guests were able to stake out stellar experiences while most did not. Under FP+, all guests are able to claim 3 FP+'s to rides. That is what Disney is going for. Use their FastPasses to bring more guests, not to give select guests more passes because they're more able, or to create a charity for those who cannot get them as well.

It is somewhat telling a bunch of capitalists spending their hard-earned dollars on a vacation that they have to submit to Marxist equality... but that is the reality. You are not an over-achieving capitalist to Disney. You are one guest. The next guest is one guest. Disney would rather sell 4 rooms and give out 3 FP each than sell one room to one person who expects 12. To resent not getting 12, when you bought admission that clearly comes with 3, is just silly. It is smart business for them to try to give me less than 12 FPs, and my savvy-ness that makes me still want to get as much as I can. It is a push and pull that makes it inherently capitalistic. I still accept that what they're doing is right, to try to not give me 12. I just don't fault them for this like some (including you?) seem to.

 

[Angel Ariel]

If your experience was different, you likely have a different opinion and that is perfectly valid, but it does not mean that I am wrong, nor does it mean that your experience is the same for everyone.

I did not ever say you were wrong, in fact I acknowledged that your experience was different and said I understood that. I only spoke to my personal experience.

 

[3DisneyFanz]

One certainly can, but that is almost NEVER what people are talking about on these boards. It is always 7DMT, or RnRC, or other top tier thrill attractions. You can get a FP+ for the rides you just mentioned right now, for today. In fact, that is what has led to a lot of complaining here, is that people do not want FP+s for those.

While I think it's crazy to even need a FP for certain things with what FP+ has done for lines I certainly appreciate them. I'll FP+ anything I can now and carry a back-up battery for the phone to manipulate them all day to avoid waiting 45 min for something I waited 20 min for pre FP+.

As for the argument of increased usage I highly doubt significantly more people are using it more effectively now than the old system. People are still waiting just as long in SB for Soarin now than they did pre FP+ and they're waiting in 30 min SB lines for things that have FP+ availability while they're in line.

Disney may hype that usage is up but every FP+ used for fireworks, parades, Figment, etc. increased usage numbers simply because they weren't available in the past. It doesn't mean that the program is a success or helping anyone it just means they made more available. Of course is it just allows you to walk onto Figment which they could have before it was added to FP+.

 

[3DisneyFanz]

I think the definition of "my share" becomes official from the offering of someone with something to sell, and the acceptance of one who buys it. If you buy what's for sale, you've accepted the share that was offered. In this case, it's one FastPass to a headliner per day.

It is not each according to his ability, as in Disney sells admission, and then those who are more able take more. Nor is it by need, as in those who cannot fend for themselves are handed to from those who earned more. It's in between. Disney wants to accommodate as many guests as possible. That is it right there! Under FP-, a few guests were able to stake out stellar experiences while most did not. Under FP+, all guests are able to claim 3 FP+'s to rides. That is what Disney is going for. Use their FastPasses to bring more guests, not to give select guests more passes because they're more able, or to create a charity for those who cannot get them as well.

It is somewhat telling a bunch of capitalists spending their hard-earned dollars on a vacation that they have to submit to Marxist equality... but that is the reality. You are not an over-achieving capitalist to Disney. You are one guest. The next guest is one guest. Disney would rather sell two rooms and give out 3 FP to each than sell one room to you who expects 6 FP. And they would rather sell 4 rooms and give out 3 FP each than sell one room to one person who expects 12.

Disney is leveraging it's rides to bring in the largest possible number of people. It is smart business for them to try to give me less than 12 FPs. It is my savvy-ness that makes me still want 12. It is a push and pull that makes it inherently capitalistic. I still accept that what they're doing is right, to try to not give me 12. I just don't fault them for this like some (including you?) seem to.

I completely agree that this whole system is a way for Disney to give you less for more.

 

[MrInfinity]

I completely agree that this whole system is a way for Disney to give you less for more.

ROFL.

 

[MouseEarsJenny]

You seem like a good person to pick their brain on the new system. I could never be as detailed as you but we are thinking of traveling during second highest peak week, so I may need to try. So may I ask when did you plan your fast passes for ? morning/mid afternoon/ evening. I plan on trying the rope drop thing for the first time ever and was unsure when to look to book the fast passes for. I think rope drop is 7am that week but was wondering if we should book for evening or book early in am and take chances on the SDFP?

We booked the fastpasses for morning at AK and EPCOT, because even the earliest fastpasses give us time to ride at least one ride by just arriving at rope drop, and there are less headliners. We figured that gave us more chances to get day-of fastpasses, if we end up wanting them. At HS and MK, we went for late morning, early afternoon (our latest is about 1:20-2:20) so that we could take advantage of the early morning with our touring plan (we use an online touring plan service, mixed with our own experience), and then still get on three "big" rides with fastpass. Since we have ADRs and parades in the late afternoon, we don't care if we ride on anything past lunch time. On our arrival day, we went with evening fastpasses because that way if traffic interferes with getting there at rope drop, at least we still have fastpasses.

I'm not an expert - this is my first time using FP+, but that was our strategy.