Resort Class Could = Fast Pass

[JACKNAG]

Well I just read this on Jim Hill Media's Web site ( He gets all the credit) Then verified his links by going directly to the US patent office and doing a search on the patent application number.

Here are some section from the patent application:

[0248] a. Spending per guest at hotels can determine different hierarchies of access to Fastpass. Thus, the more that is spent by a patron, the higher the priority can be for Fastpass.

[0249] b. Hotel accommodation in related resorts and environments associated with the entertainment center are allocated different priorities. Where a patron is in a related hotel, a higher priority can be given.


0250] c. Different levels and hierarchies can be applicable at different hotels. Thus, more luxurious hotels can have higher priorities.


0251] 2. Seasonal differences can be factored into the grant of different privileges. Accordingly, special promotions for Fastpass can be provided according to the season.

0253] Different hierarchical models can be established for the ability and right to obtain and use the Fastpass according to different priorities.

0255] a. Spending per guest at hotels can determine different hierarchies of access to Fastpass. Thus, the more that is spent by a patron, the higher the priority can be for Fastpass

Here is the Link to the patent office
www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html

Then go to published applications
Search
Published Applications (AppFT

Publication number search
then search this number
20050060173

Im interested in every ones coments

Jack

 

[croach]

While this is a rumor, it appears to be a credible one and frankly one that annoys me very greatly on two levels. One is from a personal view I just joined the DVC and I wonder what involvement Disney would give members for the rumored new Fastpass scenario. I would be vey upset if I was a loyal Disney visitor and couldn't use the fastpass system because I am not staying on the concierge level.

Second this is obviously another attempt by Disney to push people to their resorts. But I don't like the idea of making the World into a social club where people with more money can get advantages over families on a budget. Disney should not turn itself(I am sure there are other examples of this already) into a place where it treats some of it customers differently based on there income. I would like to think of WDW as a place where everyone can go and enjoy themselves and have the same oppurtunity to ride Space Mountain as the guy next them.

I know this is just a reported story and is not actually something in place yet but this one really really bothers me.

 

[WDSearcher]

Just so you know, this application has been around since the advent of FastPass. FP was originally pitched as an idea for on-site guests only, when they were trying to figure out new perks after they took away Early Entry mornings.

They may be patenting it now simply because of all of the other theme park fast pass-type services out there -- making sure that if anyone else (Six Flags, Paramount, Cedar Fair, Busch) decides to go this route, they have to pay for it as a patented concept. Just because it shows up at the patent office doesn't mean it's a done deal or, really, anything more than an idea.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

First, Disney is a business and as such can pretty much do as they please with regard to distribution of perqs to guests. They already segment resort guests, such as providing access to the AK Sunrise and Sunset Safaris only to guests staying at AKL Concierge. Do I feel slighted by this? Not at all... I have no desire to participate in those activites or stay at AKL Concierge.

Second, this is a patent application and could easily be the result of a lawsuit someone filed regarding FastPass. Disney could be doing a bit of "CYA" to avoid future lawsuits as well as protecting their investment in the FastPass system by preventing slight derivations to be branded and sold to other amusement parks.

Third, I'd love it, since I tend to spend bunches at Disney. The world already has social clubs and strata defined. If you spend more, you get more at just about any business. If this were implemented, you'd still be able to ride Space Mountain, but you may have to wait a few extra minutes while those of us who spend more $$ at Disney go ahead of you.

 

[croach]

I understand the patent angle and Disney trying to protect its ideas and the Fastpass is a great idea. And I understand that Disney has the right to do as it pleases to make money. I encourage them to make money as I have several shares of stock in the company. That said why take a very great idea that gives everyone a chance to do more while at the park and make into something only a few can afford to do. By giving people more time to do other things you give them more oppurtunity to enjoy themselves therefore giving them a positive reason to return. Also it gives them more time to spend money on souveneirs, food, etc. I also spend bunches of money at Disney but I don't think that makes my time at Disney more valuable than the family of five staying at Pop Century who want to experience as much of the world as they can on a budget.

All that said I understand that Disney would want to attach this there resort business in some way but making it based on the amount of money you spend to say in on their resort in bad business in my opinion(in my opinion is the important part there).

 

[wtg2000]

In his latest article, Jim Hill also writes that this practice has in part already begun!

I've heard Al Weiss talk about this, talk about how you could basically have your entire day planned moment-by-moment before you enter the park. "It's 2:26pm, this must be Big Thunder Mountain."

I despise this idea. If people on or off site are both paying equal amounts for admission tickets then they should get equal access. It's bad enough that on-site guests can get in early or stay late.

If Disney build enough attractions in each park to handle capacity and run those attractions at full capacity (rather than sending out boats half-full) then there will be no need for fastpass.

 

[Greg K.]

...is Walt, spinning in his grave.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

In his latest article, Jim Hill also writes that this practice has in part already begun!

I've heard Al Weiss talk about this, talk about how you could basically have you're entire day planned moment-by-moment before you enter the park.

I despise this idea. If people on or off site are both paying equal amounts for admission tickets then they should get equal access. It's bad enough that on-site guests can get in early or stay late.

If Disney build enough attractions in each park to handle capacity and ran those attractions at full capacity (rather than sending out boats half-full) then there would be no need for fastpass.

The reality is that you do not have the so-called equal access today. Disney has always been about getting more when you pay more. Remember the old "E"-ride tickets -- they certainly cost more than an "A" or "B" ride ticket. Pay more, get more.

Today, if you stay on-site, you get additional perqs that off-site guests do not get. It's not based on how much you paid to enter the parks -- it's how much $$ overall you choose to plunk down at Disney. The more you pay, the better perqs you get.

It's not "bad enough" that on-site guests get advantages -- they are advantages that the guests paid for. It all boils down to choice: if you want the advantages, you'll pay for them.

But the idea that Disney was built to provide equal access to all guests is absurd. Walt was as much a businessman as the next fellow and knew full well how to entice guests to part with their money. This same principle is applied in all sorts of businesses today. I will never understand why some people demand that Disney operate differently.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

...is Walt, spinning in his grave.

He's not spinning, he's applauding the business sense of Al Weiss.

 

[wtg2000]

The reality is that you do not have the so-called equal access today.

How so? The concept of giving certain guests better access to rides when all guests are paying the same amount to get into the park I think is wrong. Right now everyone has the same chance of getting on Splash Mountain during the regular park hours that they paid for. This would change that.

 

[WDSearcher]

How so? The concept of giving certain guests better access to rides when all guests are paying the same amount to get into the park I think is wrong. Right now everyone has the same chance of getting on Splash Mountain during the regular park hours that they paid for. This would change that.

Well ... I guess. I think what Tigger_Magic meant was that there isn't equal access because (a) not everyone can afford to go to WDW in the first place and (b) people who stay on site have other perks already that set them apart. You're talking about "regular park hours" and I see your point, but there's been a caste system among guests ever since Disney World was built. People who could afford ticket books got to ride cooler rides than people who couldn't. People who could afford to buy more single E tickets could afford to ride the cooler rides more times. I can remember plenty of times when my family bought the pass that only allowed you to do all the "free" stuff. We did "If You Had Wings" and "Carousel of Progress" and saw the parade and fireworks and then just kind of walked around and had something to eat and enjoyed the park. Maybe we bought an E or D ticket or two, but mostly we just hung out, because we couldn't afford anything else.

Now, people who can't afford $50 a person, can't even get in the gate, so they're closed out already. No lesser-priced options if you just want to be in the park. Then you have the people who can afford the tickets and the trip, but can't or don't want to stay on property. So they can't take advantage of EMH or of the E-Ticket Nights last season or of various other on-site perks.

There's always been a division.

Personally, if I'm going to fork over the dollars to pay for concierge level, I'd like it a lot if that meant I could custom-schedule my trip and get all my fastpasses at one time, with times on them, so that I knew my exact path around the parks. It would be like being on a guided tour without paying $80 an hour for a four hour minimum. It would give me guided-tour service with a bit more flexibility. And no one at the FP line would know one way or the other. I don't see how it gives me "better" access to rides.

 

[RickinNYC]

I personally don't have a problem with this concept at all. In fact, I like it. I do think that Disney resort guests should get a little more bang for their buck considering that even the values are typically more expensive than some moderate offsite hotels. Why not entice the buyer? In the business world, this is a smart move. Disney, like any other business, needs to make money to remain in the game. Let's not forget that Universal does exactly this concept. You stay onsite, you get better front of line priviledges. If you choose to stay elsewhere, you have the option of purchasing different "fast pass" level benefits. If you choose to not make that purchase nor stay at their hotel, you still get "fastpass" benefits, but not as frequently.

Edited to say that I can definitely see WDW implemented this type of program. In fact, I've been waiting for them to do so. I can't see them eradicating fast passes for everyone who chooses to stay offsite. I can see them either extending the time frame for those folks or simply keeping the system as is. It's just that I see them granting faster fastpasses to the values, even faster to the moderates, and then more for deluxe and then lightspeed for concierge.

And no, we don't always stay in deluxe resorts. Frankly, we'd rather spend our money on great food and nights out. But, truth be told, if Disney implements this, then we would be more inclined to stay Deluxe. See? The concept already works! But we'd never stay concierge. Not our style.

 

[wtg2000]

Well ... I guess. I think what Tigger_Magic meant was that there isn't equal access because (a) not everyone can afford to go to WDW in the first place and (b) people who stay on site have other perks already that set them apart. You're talking about "regular park hours" and I see your point, but there's been a caste system among guests ever since Disney World was built. People who could afford ticket books got to ride cooler rides than people who couldn't. People who could afford to buy more single E tickets could afford to ride the cooler rides more times. ...There's always been a division...

You're talking about people being able to afford more than others. But in this case two people spend the same amount of money to get into the park, but one is getting more - more FPs, less time in line, more rides. At least in your example you got more if you paid more. That's the way it is in consumer world. But you shouldn't get less while paying the same. Here, some people are getting more though they are paying the same. Imagine if it was the old ticket system - you buy an E-Ticket for Jungle Cruise and someone else buys the same ticket but gets sent to the front of the line because they are staying on property. I don't agree with that. What you pay for the hotel is for the hotel and transportation.

 

[crusader]

But what if they're not getting more FP's theoretically. What if they were only allotted the equivalent number of fastpasses they could obtain on their own in a given day anyway. Why would we care if they paid the company a sizeable premium for them?

 

[mrsR123]

Comparing a tiered fastpass system to the old A-E attractions system just isn't valid. Everyone paid the same price for an E ticket regardless of where they were spending the night. It cost more than an A ticket because it was a better-- longer, bigger, or more immersive-- ride.

Perks to on-site guests are a way to add value to the hotel experience. They likely drive business and keep the rooms more full than they would be without said perks. But the current EMH's don't take away from the day guest's experience. The featured park might be more crowded, but everyone there on that day has an equal shot at the attractions. If this twist were brought forth to fruition, though, it would definitely impact the day guest's experience, and that would be just plain wrong. It's elitist and anti-philosophy.

 

[SoCalKDG]

First a question, as a EMH guest(we always went to non-EMH day parks) can you get Fast Passes during that first, early morning hour?

Currently many of the tours give 2-4 Fastpasses, as well as front of the line access. Have dinner at MGM, get reserved seating. Fantasmic dessert at DL, get balcony seating. Purchase a package through AAA(in association w/ Disney) at DL, you get FP. Folks, special FP are already being given out.

I have no problem allowing onsite guests the advantage of reserving FP on the following conditions:

1) All guests can get at least two FP for the day(say 2 for Value, 3 for Moderate, 4 for Deluxe, 5 for Concierge). This limit is for all 4 parks total, so you can't get 20 FP if you are Concierge.

2) Still have some FP being given in the park as well. This way offsite can still get a FP if they get there early

3) Make sure DVC is at least considered a Moderate in the above listed condition(hey, I'm a DVC member )

Having said all that, what pct. of people would actually use this service? When you consider how many people don't even use FP, how many people dont' use PS(or whatever they are now called), how many people don't even plan, etc., there are still going to be a great number of FP available.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

How so? The concept of giving certain guests better access to rides when all guests are paying the same amount to get into the park I think is wrong. Right now everyone has the same chance of getting on Splash Mountain during the regular park hours that they paid for. This would change that.

You are mistaken in thinking that all guests pay the same admission price. They don't. MYW tickets have different pricing structures to allow guests to customize their admission price. Some people will pay more, others less depending on the options they choose to add or not add to the ticket.

With the current system, someone efficiently using FastPass could ride Splash Mtn several more times than those who choose to wait in the standby lines.

The reality is that Disney has made no announcement that they plan to implement any changes to FP.

 

[wtg2000]

You are mistaken in thinking that all guests pay the same admission price. They don't. MYW tickets have different pricing structures to allow guests to customize their admission price.

You are muddying the waters. That's not what I'm talking about. I know there are different pricing structures. Everybody knows that. That's not what this is about. I have an annual pass. I can go in any day I want (I paid for that privilege), but it doesn't give me better access once I'm in there. The point is that two people paying for one-day tickets or for 4-day ultimate non-expiring park hoppers should have equal access to rides and attractions. Under this possible scheme, certain people would be getting better access based on what they paid for a hotel room and not based on what they paid for their park tickets.

Some people will pay more, others less depending on the options they choose to add or not add to the ticket.

You're confusing the concept of getting something that you paid for versus getting something that you didn't pay for. It's like the posters who compared this to the old A/E-ticket system. It's not an equal argument. Some people will eat in the Mexican sitdown restaurant; others in the takeout. They get what they pay for and it's their decision. But they don't all pay the same price and the resort guests get sent to the sitdown place and the off-site guests get sent to the takeout place.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

You are muddying the waters. That's not what I'm talking about. I know there are different pricing structures. Everybody knows that. That's not what this is about. I have an annual pass. I can go in any day I want (I paid for that privilege), but it doesn't give me better access once I'm in there. The point is that two people paying for one-day tickets or for 4-day ultimate non-expiring park hoppers should have equal access to rides and attractions. Under this possible scheme, certain people would be getting better access based on what they paid for a hotel room and not based on what they paid for their park tickets.

Sorry, but I disagree. In your previous post you said The concept of giving certain guests better access to rides when all guests are paying the same amount to get into the park I think is wrong. I simply pointed out the error in your statement that all guests do not pay the same amount to get into the parks. That's not muddying the waters; it's pointing out reality.

You're confusing the concept of getting something that you paid for versus getting something that you didn't pay for. It's like the posters who compared this to the old A/E-ticket system. It's not an equal argument. Some people will eat in the Mexican sitdown restaurant; others in the takeout. They get what they pay for and it's their decision. But they don't all pay the same price and the resort guests get sent to the sitdown place and the off-site guests get sent to the takeout place.

I'm not confusing anything. My point is quite simple: you get what you pay for. That's a basic concept in business that is applicable across the board. Disney recognizes that when they provide different perks to guests. There is no requirement for them to create a level playing field for every guest and indeed, they do not do this today. Some guests get more advantages than others, depending on what they are willing to pay. The more you pay, the more you receive.

 

[brunoflipper]

mark my words, it is coming for the general public...
and not only will it be available only to certain resort classes, it will cost you a decent chunk of change...
like jim hill notes from the ebay link... "One Day-All Day Disney's FASTPASSES" already exist..
here is the ebay link from jim hill