Spend More get More Fastpasses...coming soon to a Disney near You.

[Wick]

All guests are supposed to be treated equally once they enter the parks. End of story. No one was supposed to be more "special" than anyone else. That made Disneyland unique (especially in the 1950s).

How do you reconcile that with Club 33?

 

[Another Voice]

It was a private business club for the company.

I don't get into Club 33 because I'm staying at the Disneyland Hotel instead of the Howard Johnson's. I don't get into Club 33 because a computer selected my bench for a "dream" instead of the bench next me. I can't buy an Extra Magic Pretty Princess Wonder FastPass Hopper Ticket to get me into the club.

In short - I have the same chance of getting into Club 33 as everyone else who buys a Disneyland ticket. None.


One gets the feeling that people are okay with the idea that Disneyland ought to be like some sort of Sunset Strip hotspot - the big bouncer standing at the velvet rope out front deciding who gets in and who doesn't. Yes, I'm sure there are many, many people here who would love for only the most magical of the princesses to be allowed in and to keep all those other, less deserving people. Disney is to become your own private club..

 

[Demosthenes]

But it's the same "perk" - I don't get an 'Extra Magic Hour plus 90 Minutes' because I'm staying at the Grand Floridian, nor do I get just the fifteen minutes because I'm staying at the Pop.

That is immaterial. Disney resort guests get a better, extended park value for the same park ticket price. The argument that the price of the ticket should dictate the same value experience is neither true in practice, nor in theory. It wasn't set up that way from day one.

All guests are supposed to be treated equally once they enter the parks. End of story. No one was supposed to be more "special" than anyone else. That made Disneyland unique (especially in the 1950s).
.

All guests are treated equally; all guests can purchase whatever level of service they want. Attraction tickets worked in exactly this way; guests purchased the level of theme park entertainment they wanted. Failure of one guest to purchase a higher level of experience does not mean they were excluded from the opportunity to do so. Not all guests get to eat food, but all guests who choose to do so are welcome to pay for it. Fastpass is a value-added perk. No guest is compelled to use it, neither is it sold. If Disney (or Universal, or Six Flags) can find a way offer premium service for a premium price, why shouldn't they do so?

 

[Demosthenes]

It was a private business club for the company.

I don't get into Club 33 because I'm staying at the Disneyland Hotel instead of the Howard Johnson's. I don't get into Club 33 because a computer selected my bench for a "dream" instead of the bench next me. I can't buy an Extra Magic Pretty Princess Wonder FastPass Hopper Ticket to get me into the club.

It doesn't matter how it is paid for, only that it is paid for. Whether that fee is collected through dues or through hotel costs is irrelevant; the point is that a fee is collected for an enhanced park experience.

 

[Another Voice]

Whether that fee is collected through dues or through hotel costs is irrelevant; the point is that a fee is collected for an enhanced park experience.

Traditionally the "park" experience has been treated separately than the "resort" experience. As a Disney guest, once inside the park it didn't matter where I was staying.

I can see Disney changing this. I'm sure there are a lot of people that are happy with it. The strongest driving force among all levels of "Disneydom" these days seems to be a sense of entitlement. If it's not DVC members demanding perks, its the annual passholders - now all we've done is throw in the folks staying at the "deluxe" resorts into the mix. Everyone wants their own Super Magic Superior Perk.

I guess that just going to Walt Disney World isn't enough anymore.

But to me, all this does is make WDW into on giant ship where once you're in steerage, you're forever banished to steerage. It removes a lot of flexibility that people used to enjoy at the resort.

Some people prefer to spend the money on the hotel and less in the parks. A lot of people prefer to save on accomidations (since they're nothing but a bed and a shower) and live it up at the parks and restuarants.

Now Disney is taking that choice away from all of us. Unless we're willing to drop huge bucks all over the place, we're second and third class. If FastPasses go to the elite, why not ADRs? They're paying more for the hotel - why shouldn't they have to right to bar me and my family from a restaurant too?

The idea of the Disney theme park is that everyone is equally special once inside. Sure, it's an imperfetr system - but it's better than tossing it out for the "big bucks or scum" system Disney is rapidly adopting.

 

[raidermatt]

That is immaterial. Disney resort guests get a better, extended park value for the same park ticket price. The argument that the price of the ticket should dictate the same value experience is neither true in practice, nor in theory. It wasn't set up that way from day one.

That's the point. "You pay more you get more" wasn't set up from day one either.

Further, the pay more get more philosophy is being expanded. While you might be fine with that it is still a change. It's far from immaterial. While resort guests get that extra time before or after the regular hours, all resort guests still got those same hours. Not so with FP if the rumors come true.

Even further, extra hours are before or after regular operating hours. All guests remain equal during regular operating hours, even today. Tiering FPs changes that as well.

It doesn't matter how it is paid for, only that it is paid for. Whether that fee is collected through dues or through hotel costs is irrelevant; the point is that a fee is collected for an enhanced park experience.

Club 33 wasn't originally going to be simply a pay more you get more type of venture. That's what it has become.

Further, you're talking about a fraction of a percent of the guests that come to Disneyland. It's like using the argument that the PM of England gets special treatment so that proves there has always been special treatment for all guests.

The impact of things like FP is exponentially greater, and therefore its a significant change.

 

[Demosthenes]

That's the point. "You pay more you get more" wasn't set up from day one either.

Actually, that is precisely how it was set up from day one; that is exactly what the ticketed attraction system was all about. The more you paid, the more you got. Of course the rumored changes indicate an expansion of the current "pay more, get more" philosophy, but it is hardly new.

I keep hearing that this is Disney's reaction to some entitlement mentality amongst the deluxe and DVC resort guests, but this is not being done because of a groundswell of guest demands. Instead it is a marketing idea for how to sell more deluxe and DVC rooms. This seems like a perfectly reasonable plan. The reality is that those who have paid little or nothing are the ones crying over their "entitlements."

 

[Another Voice]

The reality is that those who have paid little or nothing are the ones crying over their "entitlements."

You pay more for the hotel, you get more at the hotel.

That in no way means you get more anywhere else. That attitude is exactly a sense of entitlement - that being "special" in one area requires you be treated "special" everywhere else. Now if you want to pay more for your theme park ticket than I do, fine.

Sorry, but one of Disneyland's charms was that it was the exact opposite of the snooty place you are asking it to become. Everyone who went on a ride got the same show, whether they were rich or poor, man or woman, white or black.

If you demand special treatment, places like Vegas love to cater to "special" people. Flash a Benjamin and they'll fawn all over you for a good fifteen seconds.

But Disney should be different. It's an idealized world. Imperfect, but that's no reason to surrender to the lessor traits of human nature. There's no reason you should demand to degrade the experience of other guests just because you can afford what they choose not to buy.

 

[raidermatt]

Actually, that is precisely how it was set up from day one; that is exactly what the ticketed attraction system was all about. The more you paid, the more you got. Of course the rumored changes indicate an expansion of the current "pay more, get more" philosophy, but it is hardly new.

Pay for what you ride is not the same as pay more get more. There's no tiered benefit system. It's just a different pricing system, but everyone who buys a ticket for a ride is treated the same.

Instead it is a marketing idea for how to sell more deluxe and DVC rooms. This seems like a perfectly reasonable plan. The reality is that those who have paid little or nothing are the ones crying over their "entitlements."

Who's crying? I thought we were "reasonably" discussing a business practice?

And for the record, I would likely be on the receiving end of the extra FPs if things happened as Mr. Hill described.

Frankly, I haven't read any comments from those who would not likely be receiving extra FPs that smack of entitlement. Not being happy about a change is not automatically an entitlement mentality.

 

[Demosthenes]

You pay more for the hotel, you get more at the hotel.



That in no way means you get more anywhere else. That attitude is exactly a sense of entitlement - that being "special" in one area requires you be treated "special" everywhere else. Now if you want to pay more for your theme park ticket than I do, fine.

Sorry, but one of Disneyland's charms was that it was the exact opposite of the snooty place you are asking it to become. Everyone who went on a ride got the same show, whether they were rich or poor, man or woman, white or black.

If you demand special treatment, places like Vegas love to cater to "special" people. Flash a Benjamin and they'll fawn all over you for a good fifteen seconds.

But Disney should be different. It's an idealized world. Imperfect, but that's no reason to surrender to the lessor traits of human nature. There's no reason you should demand to degrade the experience of other guests just because you can afford what they choose not to buy.

Maybe some guests are asking for additional privileges, but I think we can agree that this is not what is pushing this potential change. The idea here is to sell hotel rooms. If hotel rooms in deluxe and DVC properties won't move at their current price you can either lower the price, or incentivize the room. Clearly one successful incentive has been free dining. Perhaps the thinking is that a more permanent incentive would encourage people to see the "value" of deluxe accommodations. While it certainly can be argued that Disney can and should provide better service in the hotels, I suspect that Disney sees their theme parks as a bigger draw than their service; additionally, the theme parks would appeal to a larger audience. I cannot see how this is a problem. Again, I go back to the way the parks operated when they first opened. You used to purchase admission, and then ticket books for individual attractions. You purchased the exact level of service that you wanted to purchase. Some people bought more, some people bought less, but everyone had the opportunity to buy what they wanted. The difference today would be that everyone pays the same admission price, and can ride the same rides. Today the premium is not to experience certain attractions repeatedly for more money, but instead to reduce wait times for more money. I cannot concede that it matters where the money is collected for this service. I suspect that if it is implemented then, like Universal's Express pass, the service could also be purchased in the parks, but even if it wasn't, why should it matter how the money is collected?

 

[Demosthenes]

Pay for what you ride is not the same as pay more get more. There's no tiered benefit system. It's just a different pricing system, but everyone who buys a ticket for a ride is treated the same.

You can argue semantics if you want, but as I said in the previous post, under the rumored system, everyone still gets treated the same; you simply could purchase the right to get reduced waits. It wouldn't eliminate the right to collect free fastpasses for non-deluxe guests. I see little difference in selling more tickets to an attraction vs. selling reduced waits; in fact, if all you are doing is selling reduced waits, it seems even more progressive than the original policy.

Who's crying? I thought we were "reasonably" discussing a business practice?

And for the record, I would likely be on the receiving end of the extra FPs if things happened as Mr. Hill described.

Frankly, I haven't read any comments from those who would not likely be receiving extra FPs that smack of entitlement. Not being happy about a change is not automatically an entitlement mentality.

Fair enough, but I think the same goes for preaching about an entitlement mentality since no one is demanding this perk in the first place.

 

[Another Voice]

I see little difference in selling more tickets to an attraction vs. selling reduced waits; in fact, if all you are doing is selling reduced waits, it seems even more progressive than the original policy.

The difference being that the shorter wait time you purchase directly results in a longer wait time for me and my family.

The more Fast Pass tickets that are granted as entitlements either a) reduces the number of FasPasses available for normal distribution and/or b) must come from capacity used for the "stand-by" line.

For every FastPass you are gifted, I will have less of a change to get one through normal means (the machines inside the park) or I have will have to wait in longer lines when I can't get a FastPass.

This situation is entirely different than what happens with the "pay for service" resorts - getting an extra ounce of Grand Floridian shampoo in your goodie tray does not take away an ounce of soap I get down at the All Stars.

That's what makes the sitation so unethical - Disney is enhancing the value of deluxe resorts by taking away value from people staying elsewhere. I can see where Disney wants to do this: there are plenty of people demanding to be treated as special, and it's easier to throw cheap FastPasses at people than it is to make the "deluxe" hotels actually worth the prices Disney charges.

But just becasue it's easy for The Company doesn't make it right.

 

[raidermatt]

It's not semantics, it's a fundamental difference in strategy.

If anybody is given more FPs, there are fewer for everybody else. So not only do you get a benefit over other guests in the parks at the same time by paying more for a hotel room (which is already a fundamental change), those other guests see their opportunity reduced. There are a finite number of FPs that can be distributed.

You can support the strategy if you wish, but it's still a significant change and not something that can be washed away by calling "semantics" and "entitlement".

Fair enough, but I think the same goes for preaching about an entitlement mentality since no one is demanding this perk in the first place.

Where I've seen that creep in is when some say "Yes, deluxe guests should get more since they pay more." That I have definitely seen. Not from you, but it is most definitely out there. There's always been a group of people who have said they should get more because they stay at a deluxe. This just seems to be giving some of them a rallying cry.

 

[TSR6]

I've also heard that the passes may go from regular paper tickets to hard plastic like a credit card with your picture on it.

Doubtful. Due to the "rate of re-issue," or how often tickets are damaged, lost, ect and then a new copy reprinted, it's never been cost effective to go to those type of tickets...

 

[Demosthenes]

The difference being that the shorter wait time you purchase directly results in a longer wait time for me and my family.

The more Fast Pass tickets that are granted as entitlements either a) reduces the number of FasPasses available for normal distribution and/or b) must come from capacity used for the "stand-by" line.

For every FastPass you are gifted, I will have less of a change to get one through normal means (the machines inside the park) or I have will have to wait in longer lines when I can't get a FastPass.

This situation is entirely different than what happens with the "pay for service" resorts - getting an extra ounce of Grand Floridian shampoo in your goodie tray does not take away an ounce of soap I get down at the All Stars.

That's what makes the sitation so unethical - Disney is enhancing the value of deluxe resorts by taking away value from people staying elsewhere. I can see where Disney wants to do this: there are plenty of people demanding to be treated as special, and it's easier to throw cheap FastPasses at people than it is to make the "deluxe" hotels actually worth the prices Disney charges.

But just becasue it's easy for The Company doesn't make it right.

It is true that the nature of fastpasses is that someone else will likely have to wait in line longer so that you can get on sooner. It is hyperbole to suggest that this is unethical for Disney to offer as a servie that can be purchased. Is it unethical to offer prime viewing for parades and shows to Platinum Plan guests, or reserved seating to Fantasmic Dinner Package Guests? In both cases someone else who wouldn’t shell out the bucks was refused a better park experience in lieu of someone who would come off the cash. Does fastpass distribution affect more people? Sure, but the principle is the same.

 

[Demosthenes]

It's not semantics, it's a fundamental difference in strategy.

It seems to be semantics to me (which was not thrown out to be flippant or dismissive). I cannot concede that is is a fundamental difference in strategy. In both cases, the person with deeper pockets benefited the most. In my view, "pay by the ride" vs. "pay more get more" is essentially the same thing. I think anyone would have to concede that the result of the fastpass system is that some people will suffer so that others may benefit, but that is the case now.

 

[Another Voice]

Is it unethical to offer prime viewing for parades and shows to Platinum Plan guests, or reserved seating to Fantasmic Dinner Package Guests?

So past wrongs justify new wrongs.

The way Disney had operated - yes, Fantasmic Dinner packages are unDisney. They take away spots that normal guests would have been able to use.

You have to ask yourself - how did Disney grow and thrive for nearly fifty yers without having to con, cheat, squirel and pummel their guests for pennies. Cheap and ignorant plans like 'FastPasses for the Elite' are a signal that Disney can't manage its core business anymore. The nickel and dime scams are for businesses that give a fudge about people, or the fly-by-night flea carnivals.

Build a ride that people will travel to see - you'll book the hotel rooms. Run restaurants that offer good value and service - you'll be able to charge for the food.

But sharpening pencils is either than creating quality. Maybe if one day Disney focuses back on the reason why people go to WDW - and it's not because they'll get a free FastPass - the company won't need cheat their customers anymore.

 

[minnie61650]

Disney did try Fastpass before. At Disneyland they provided a few hotel guests "Enhanced Fastpass", which allowed guests to hold upto to one FastPass for every attraction at the same time. That benefit was discontinued after 2006 for reasons Disney never explained.

This website explains how the "Enhanced Fastpass" worked:

http://www.mouseplanet.com/misc.php?pg=fastpass

 

[YoHo]

Disneyland hates fastpass as they rightly should. Nobody from management down to the line workers wants fast pass in the PArk that Walt built.


I've been ignoring this thread, but I just caught up a bit.

As AV said, those special parade viewing areas, the Fantasmic Dinner packages, all that stuff is so UnDisney it's laughable. IT eats up prime viewing realestate that used to be for anyone.

 

[Another Voice]

Disneyland also tried a form of FastPass Elite for the high-spending guests. When staying at the Disneyland, Grand Californian or Paradise Pier hotels a guest either got one-per-stay or one-per-day "Magic FastPasses", depending on the amount of money they spent on the hotel room. The "Magic" FastPass was good on any attraction at any time (thus, many times more valuable than WDW's planned early reservation system). Disneyland discontinued the program because it wasn't a popular selling point.