My FP+ success story ..

[Laketravis]

What does that mean? I am not debating or arguing about it at all, none whatsoever, I am just curious what that means?

From this early article: Disney

"Mr. Staggs said Disney’s board decided to move ahead with the technology upgrades in February 2011 only after identifying multiple ways in which the initiative could expand profits."

"Prodding guests to do more advance planning, combined with the tracking of guests as they roam the parks, will help Disney manage its work force more efficiently. More advance planning will also help lock visitors into Disney once they arrive in Orlando, discouraging people, for instance, from making impromptu visits to Universal’s Wizarding World of Harry Potter."

"Disney’s global parks operation, which has an estimated 121.4 million admissions a year and generates $12.9 billion in revenue, is so huge that it can greatly influence consumer behavior."

 

[SmithSmith]

Exactly - but of course, Lake and Shaden will just condescend to us that we just don't understand what Pavlovian response means.

Exactly.

And even if he wasn't likening us to dogs, he was still implying we were trained test subjects that were unaware we're being conditioned to "feel victorious" in accepting "trivial treats".

No matter what his intent, his comment was still demeaning!

All he had to do was simply apologize and all would've been fine.

 

[BugsDaddy]

Not at all, in general I believe people's positive accounts, just like I believe the many negative accounts we have seen here, just like I believe that you got $160 when you withdrew $100. But the overall impact, the average effect of the system, is something else entirely and is best determined by tracking aggregate data, which is what Josh has posted. You are free to provide your own analysis, by all means let me know how your conclusions differ from his and why, maybe you will provide a more convincing interpretation. Others posited that there was a huge spike in attendance for instance, but then we were informed that attendance was only slightly up. Again of course, this is only according to Disney, maybe they are lying to us ? And I have questioned the data, and have seen the data posted by Josh corroborated by others, and have also done so myself.

My stance has already been proven because my stance isn't hard to prove. I have already said that FP+ does not work for every person. The other side of the argument are ones making absolute statements such as FP+ does not work for the majority of people and when users post specific instances (unprovoked) of it working for them and working very successfully, they are often times called either liars or pawns of Disney.

Wait times and how those wait times are reported can be affected by so much more than just FP+ but so many are so willing to jump to that conclusion or connect dots that are not there.

FP+ had some issues he it first was rolled out. Are you confident that the data that is being rolled out is not reflective of that and has not taken into account any of the improvements that have been made to the system since? Are you confident that wait times are only being affected by the FP+ system?

When it comes out that attendance is up in the parks, the FP+ detractors claim that it is due to the economy being better and is not because guests have accepted/like the FP+ system and that may be true but if they admit attendance is up, could that also be affecting the wait times thus invalidating the data used to support their original argument?

 

[DisneyKidds]

While I would highly doubt your account of wait times, that's my prerogative, based on the fact that I have seen nothing like it on these boards in the time I have been here, ever.

To each his own.....

I'm tempted to ask what any blog site's analysis of posted standby wait times has to do with what someone's experience using FP+ is actually going to be like? Yes, Josh can take a bunch of inaccurately posted standby wait times from throughout the day over a period of time to determine that the average posted inaccurate standby wait time after implementation of FP+ is longer than the average posted inaccurate standby wait time was under legacy FP.

So what? How does that relate to Lake's comment that current WDW visitors have to 'be happy with three attractions per day with long waits for everything else'? It doesn't.

First off, people aren't just using the standby lines, they are using FP+ for some rides. Secondly, people aren't waiting in average inaccurately reported standby lines over a period of time. They are waiting in actual standby lines at differing times throughout an actual day, which can greatly deviate from some overall average based on flawed data.

You are such a fan of Josh's empirical evidence, I bet you can look it up for Dec 30 to confirm my account.....

Enter Hollywood Studios at 7:40am (stated opening 8:00)
Ride TSMM, posted wait 15 minutes, in first ride vehicle, wait 0 minutes. High score for the day! Woohoo!!
Ride RnR, posted wait time 15 minutes, wait 10.
Ride ToT, posted wait time 20 minutes, wait 10
Ride Star Tours, posted wait time 10 minutes, wait 0.
Exit Hollywood Studios at 9:05
Arrive MK at 5:00, after checking in at hotel, having a sit down meal, a short nap (gonna be out late), and a dip in the pool (even though cloudy/damp).
Ride (3 of 5 people) Space Mountain (FP), posted wait time 90 minutes, wait 0.
Holiday Wishes - didn't count this in my 15 attractions.
Ride 7DMT (FP), posted wait time 120 minutes, wait 0.
Ride Thunder Mountain (FP), posted wait time 90 minutes, wait 0.
Ride (boys, 2 of 5 people) Speedway, posted wait time 40 minutes, wait 0.
Ride Small World, posted wait time 25 minutes, wait 15.
See Philharmagic, posted wait time 15 minutes, wait 5.
Midnight fireworks - didn't count this in my 15 attractions.
See Laugh Floor, posted wait time 10 minutes, wait 0.
Ride TTA , wait 0
Ride Buzz, posted wait 15 minutes, wait 5.
Ride Buzz again, posted wait time 15 minutes, wait 5
Ride Teacups, posted wait 10, wait 0.
Exit MK at 1:30am, park still open for another hour and a half, little to no wait for most rides.

That's 490 minutes of 'posted standby wait time', you know.....like Josh will use from that day in his 'analysis', on rides that we actually only spent 50 minutes in line for. So, you have my apologies, the posted standby times weren't 10 times what we waited, the were 10 times minus 10 minutes!

 

[mellyf]

Before, if you are in Fantasyland, and you feel it's too busy, you go over to Frontierland, and see the return time for BTMRR, and maybe pull an FP- for it. You would WALK over there, look and decide. NOW, you just look at your phone, see if you want to pull a FP+ for it, or Splash, or if it's worth walking over there at all.


.

I know this is a small point, but I just wanted to say that I used my phone with FP- to see if I wanted to walk to ride to get a FP. Touring Plans and (I think) the Disney app both had that capability.

 

[BugsDaddy]

From this early article: Disney "Mr. Staggs said Disney’s board decided to move ahead with the technology upgrades in February 2011 only after identifying multiple ways in which the initiative could expand profits." "Prodding guests to do more advance planning, combined with the tracking of guests as they roam the parks, will help Disney manage its work force more efficiently. More advance planning will also help lock visitors into Disney once they arrive in Orlando, discouraging people, for instance, from making impromptu visits to Universal’s Wizarding World of Harry Potter." "Disney’s global parks operation, which has an estimated 121.4 million admissions a year and generates $12.9 billion in revenue, is so huge that it can greatly influence consumer behavior."

So, Disney wants to put a system in place to maximize their profits and discourage guests from visiting their competition? How dare they! Wait, doesn't Universal and oh, every other company in America want to do the same thing?

 

[Suvadoo]

From this early article: Disney

"Mr. Staggs said Disney’s board decided to move ahead with the technology upgrades in February 2011 only after identifying multiple ways in which the initiative could expand profits."

"Prodding guests to do more advance planning, combined with the tracking of guests as they roam the parks, will help Disney manage its work force more efficiently. More advance planning will also help lock visitors into Disney once they arrive in Orlando, discouraging people, for instance, from making impromptu visits to Universal’s Wizarding World of Harry Potter."

"Disney’s global parks operation, which has an estimated 121.4 million admissions a year and generates $12.9 billion in revenue, is so huge that it can greatly influence consumer behavior."

I propose a new game: Substitute the word "cattle" for the following words in Tom Stagg's speach: guests, visitors, people,and consumer.

Can anyone say Mooo??

 

[Laketravis]

So, Disney wants to put a system in place to maximize their profits and discourage guests from visiting their competition? How dare they! Wait, doesn't Universal and oh, every other company in America want to do the same thing?

A previous poster asked what the reference to modifying guest behavior meant. That article provided a bit of an explanation for them.

Your comments illustrate exactly how a constructive discussion can be pulled off track. I don't see how they contribute in a positive manner, yet you would be among the first to "call somebody out on the carpet" for posting similarly.

 

[mom2rtk]

The mistake many make in evaluating line wait times is taking the list of what is possible with FP+ and adding up how long they waited, then comparing that to what the wait would have been with legacy FP.

I think it needs to be the other way around. Take what you would have been able to ride under legacy FP, then compare that to how long you would need to wait under FP+ to accomplish the same thing.

I would have gotten a shorter wait on both TT and Soarin at Epcot. Now one is likely a standby wait and one is a fastpass wait.

If I pulled FPS for TSMM once and RSR 3 times at DHS, I got 3 short waits. If I tried to replicate that now, it's likely that only 1 of those 4 rides would be by FP.

 

[Laketravis]

I see the article used the words "Prodding guests". Does anyone see this as an inference by the New York Times that guests are cattle?

 

[Shaden]

My stance has already been proven because my stance isn't hard to prove. I have already said that FP+ does not work for every person. The other side of the argument are ones making absolute statements such as FP+ does not work for the majority of people and when users post specific instances (unprovoked) of it working for them and working very successfully, they are often times called either liars or pawns of Disney.

Wait times and how those wait times are reported can be affected by so much more than just FP+ but so many are so willing to jump to that conclusion or connect dots that are not there.

FP+ had some issues he it first was rolled out. Are you confident that the data that is being rolled out is not reflective of that and has not taken into account any of the improvements that have been made to the system since? Are you confident that wait times are only being affected by the FP+ system?

When it comes out that attendance is up in the parks, the FP+ detractors claim that it is due to the economy being better and is not because guests have accepted/like the FP+ system and that may be true but if they admit attendance is up, could that also be affecting the wait times thus invalidating the data used to support their original argument?

Of course this is far more complicated than a single causal element, but it is pretty clear that FP+ causes SB wait times to increase (though this is going a little astray from the original point of this thread, the "success" in taking 3 days to secure an FP for a single ride). The data has been tracked and has been consistent, even as the bugs were worked out, attendance figures have been released (at least the % increase in attendance has been noted in investor calls, and yes there are debates about the cause of this, the economy, the popularity of Frozen, FP+ etc.), it is really silly to argue that FP+ does not increase SB wait times. It does. It -should-. That is just an impact of the system, and the increased number of FPs distributed and the number of attractions it is available on. We can site personal individual experiences and ways to try and work around that, but that doesn't change the overall impact. We can discuss who this impacts most and what this does to any given individual's average overall wait time.

Anyway, this is now going quite astray from the original post, though I do like the discussion on this topic, the overall impact of FP+, even if others like to say "its here to stay, deal with it" ... I am really not so sure. In some iteration, I am sure it will still be here, but what its final form is ... that is up in the air still.

The original post was about the fact that a person spent 3 days checking and rechecking trying to secure an FP for a ride, they were successful in doing so, but I don't really consider this a "success", I consider this demonstrative of what is wrong with the system. Its great that other folks at other times are able to find them. I don't think anyone really thinks its impossible, they might even have used to word impossible, but I think they -mean- that it is difficult, or unlikely. And of course they would recognize that during the slower parts of the year, it will be easier, and the busier parts of the year even less likely. Of course this is now playing out on the "Planning backlash" thread. So that's interesting too.

 

[BugsDaddy]

A previous poster asked what the reference to modifying guest behavior meant. That article provided a bit of an explanation for them. Your comments illustrate exactly how a constructive discussion can be pulled off track. I don't see how they contribute in a positive manner, yet you would be among the first to "call somebody out on the carpet" for posting similarly.

No, look at Suvadoo's message above this one. That is how constructive discussions are pulled off track. By calling Disney guests, "cattle". This being driven from your posting of the article.

 

[SmithSmith]

I propose a new game: Substitute the word "cattle" for the following words in Tom Stagg's speach: guests, visitors, people,and consumer.

Can anyone say Mooo??

Did you actually read the article?

Tom Staggs was barely quoted in it. What LT posted was verbiage used by the New York Times, not Disney.

 

[wisblue]

So, Disney wants to put a system in place to maximize their profits and discourage guests from visiting their competition? How dare they! Wait, doesn't Universal and oh, every other company in America want to do the same thing?

Yes, what was Universal doing when they put the two segments of the Wizarding World in different parks? Maybe they understood that a lot of the people who don't have much interest in the rest of what US has to offer would be flocking to see the Harry Potter attractions. So, anyone who wants to see both Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley and ride the Hogwarts Express now has to either buy a one day 2 park ticket at a price of over $130 or a multiple day 2 park ticket.

 

[Shaden]

To each his own.....

I'm tempted to ask what any blog site's analysis of posted standby wait times has to do with what someone's experience using FP+ is actually going to be like? Yes, Josh can take a bunch of inaccurately posted standby wait times from throughout the day over a period of time to determine that the average posted inaccurate standby wait time after implementation of FP+ is longer than the average posted inaccurate standby wait time was under legacy FP.

So what? How does that relate to Lake's comment that current WDW visitors have to 'be happy with three attractions per day with long waits for everything else'? It doesn't.

First off, people aren't just using the standby lines, they are using FP+ for some rides. Secondly, people aren't waiting in average inaccurately reported standby lines over a period of time. They are waiting in actual standby lines at differing times throughout an actual day, which can greatly deviate from some overall average based on flawed data.

You are such a fan of Josh's empirical evidence, I bet you can look it up for Dec 30 to confirm my account.....

Enter Hollywood Studios at 7:40am (stated opening 8:00)
Ride TSMM, posted wait 15 minutes, in first ride vehicle, wait 0 minutes. High score for the day! Woohoo!!
Ride RnR, posted wait time 15 minutes, wait 10.
Ride ToT, posted wait time 20 minutes, wait 10
Ride Star Tours, posted wait time 10 minutes, wait 0.
Exit Hollywood Studios at 9:05
Arrive MK at 5:00, after checking in at hotel, having a sit down meal, a short nap (gonna be out late), and a dip in the pool (even though cloudy/damp).
Ride (3 of 5 people) Space Mountain (FP), posted wait time 90 minutes, wait 0.
Holiday Wishes - didn't count this in my 15 attractions.
Ride 7DMT (FP), posted wait time 120 minutes, wait 0.
Ride Thunder Mountain (FP), posted wait time 90 minutes, wait 0.
Ride (boys, 2 of 5 people) Speedway, posted wait time 40 minutes, wait 0.
Ride Small World, posted wait time 25 minutes, wait 15.
See Philharmagic, posted wait time 15 minutes, wait 5.
Midnight fireworks - didn't count this in my 15 attractions.
See Laugh Floor, posted wait time 10 minutes, wait 0.
Ride TTA , wait 0
Ride Buzz, posted wait 15 minutes, wait 5.
Ride Buzz again, posted wait time 15 minutes, wait 5
Ride Teacups, posted wait 10, wait 0.
Exit MK at 1:30am, park still open for another hour and a half, little to no wait for most rides.

That's 490 minutes of 'posted standby wait time', you know.....like Josh will use from that day in his 'analysis', on rides that we actually only spent 50 minutes in line for. So, you have my apologies, the posted standby times weren't 10 times what we waited, the were 10 times minus 10 minutes!

My post had nothing to do with any assertion that you can only ride three rides, so ummmm ... yea.


Two other notes, you are using FPs, there are no posted wait times for FPs. Its pretty silly to try and claim that wait times are inaccurate because you rode a bunch of rides and spent 1/10th of the time wait compared to what was posted, when you weren't actually waiting in those lines. Seriously.

Secondly, there is almost never a 0 wait. Even with FP. It might be a minute, 2 mins, 5 mins and we have seen much higher. But 0? Really, I can see that for your TSMM ride, if you literally walked right there and just continued walking full speed through the waiting area and popped right down on the ride and a well timed trip through Star Tours can end up like that. But Space, 7DMT, Big Thunder, when they have waits of over an hour, FP is going to have a wait, even for a few minutes. Though again, your use of FP and applying to try and demonstrate that wait times are inaccurate is pretty odd.

 

[BugsDaddy]

Of course this is far more complicated than a single causal element, but it is pretty clear that FP+ causes SB wait times to increase (though this is going a little astray from the original point of this thread, the "success" in taking 3 days to secure an FP for a single ride). The data has been tracked and has been consistent, even as the bugs were worked out, attendance figures have been released (at least the % increase in attendance has been noted in investor calls, and yes there are debates about the cause of this, the economy, the popularity of Frozen, FP+ etc.), it is really silly to argue that FP+ does not increase SB wait times. It does. It -should-. That is just an impact of the system, and the increased number of FPs distributed and the number of attractions it is available on. We can site personal individual experiences and ways to try and work around that, but that doesn't change the overall impact. We can discuss who this impacts most and what this does to any given individual's average overall wait time. Anyway, this is now going quite astray from the original post, though I do like the discussion on this topic, the overall impact of FP+, even if others like to say "its here to stay, deal with it" ... I am really not so sure. In some iteration, I am sure it will still be here, but what its final form is ... that is up in the air still. The original post was about the fact that a person spent 3 days checking and rechecking trying to secure an FP for a ride, they were successful in doing so, but I don't really consider this a "success", I consider this demonstrative of what is wrong with the system. Its great that other folks at other times are able to find them. I don't think anyone really thinks its impossible, they might even have used to word impossible, but I think they -mean- that it is difficult, or unlikely. And of course they would recognize that during the slower parts of the year, it will be easier, and the busier parts of the year even less likely. Of course this is now playing out on the "Planning backlash" thread. So that's interesting too.

What seems to be getting lost here is that "success" is up to the interpretation of the guest. If the guest observes the interaction as positive, that is what it is. It doesn't matter at all how you perceive the event and whether you consider the event successful because you are not determining how this person chooses to spend their vacation dollars. I just think it's fascinating how some people in this group are so brash as to tell other people that their good experience is invalidated. What gives you that authority? People are smart enough to make up their own minds.

Oh, and while attendance continues to rise (even through the worst of FP when they were having many issues) and with the investment Disney has made in this system, I can pretty confidently say that it is here to stay, so the detractors can learn to deal with it and continue to complain or find some other vacation spot.

 

[Suvadoo]

The mistake many make in evaluating line wait times is taking the list of what is possible with FP+ and adding up how long they waited, then comparing that to what the wait would have been with legacy FP.

I think it needs to be the other way around. Take what you would have been able to ride under legacy FP, then compare that to how long you would need to wait under FP+ to accomplish the same thing.

I would have gotten a shorter wait on both TT and Soarin at Epcot. Now one is likely a standby wait and one is a fastpass wait.

If I pulled FPS for TSMM once and RSR 3 times at DHS, I got 3 short waits. If I tried to replicate that now, it's likely that only 1 of those 4 rides would be by FP.

You only mention the headliners, but what about the waits for attractions like HM and IASW? Under legacy, we would've ridden the headliners with FP and then had shorter waits for HM or POC. So overall, we were able to do more with legacy.

 

[estherhead]

So you think I'll come back with glowing reviews after I try it? We've discussed this before. I have a very specific touring style that most would agree does not mesh with FP+.

Wait a minute. You've never been to WDW with fp+? But you are all over these board saying it won't work for you?

When are you planning on trying it out? Or you aren't?

 

[Laketravis]

Attractions like Philharmagic, Laugh Floor, Captain EO, Ellen's Energy Adventure, etc. really don't offer a good basis for comparison as those are scheduled events and the likelihood that anyone entering the queue is going to wait beyond the next scheduled show time is extremely small.

In that capacity, those served us well on our last visit after we used up our 3 FP's for the day, the kiosk selections were extremely limited (and often included choices from the above schedule events), and the standby lines for everything else were well beyond what we were willing to wait. Under those conditions, the scheduled large-capacity attractions were our only options.

 

[Suvadoo]

Yes, what was Universal doing when they put the two segments of the Wizarding World in different parks? Maybe they understood that a lot of the people who don't have much interest in the rest of what US has to offer would be flocking to see the Harry Potter attractions. So, anyone who wants to see both Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley and ride the Hogwarts Express now has to either buy a one day 2 park ticket at a price of over $130 or a multiple day 2 park ticket.

With Universal, I feel I am benefiting from getting a 2 park ticket. I get an additional attraction. I don't derive any benefit from FP+