TSM standby-less test Oct. 6-9

[canoe86]

Folks dining discussion should be kept for the restaurant board.
Thank you for your assistance, otherwise with the thread derailed it will be closed.

Ok everyone....please keep this on topic and no criticism of moderators or your post shall be deleted.

 

[flicx]

I think the disconnect Disney is dealing with is that some, perhaps most, of their customers felt the long standby lines were a perfect example of customer service taking a back seat. Those customers feel FP is a step toward Disney without long lines, and the only thing that would make it better is more fast passes. The only way to add fast passes is to cut down standby. I don't think it was a totally idiotic move to take a slow week and try and eliminate standby all together to see if they could keep the ride at capacity with FP only.

If all their customers were on the same page, they wouldn't have any difficulty deciding what would make them happy. Unfortunately, we all disagree.

Disney's problems have started primarily with their now almost total focus on the bottom line. They have been ignoring the very successful formula that worked for decades. These tests that go unannounced are just a small part of the problem. A problem I and many others feel would have been easily solved by building more attractions and refurbing others with even half the money they spent on the MME package. We all don't disagree, a huge number of us would be soooo much happier if they just spent the money in a fashion that wasn't almost totally meant to drive up the bottom line and not on improving the customers experience. Of course Disney is feeding us the line that this is improving the customer experience, that is very debatable!

 

[magicbob]

Wait times at TSM look to be about 75 minutes, instead of the very efficient 55 minutes FP+ only netted, so I think it's over.

So, let me see if I have this straight... They denied thousands of people the opportunity to ride and the net gain was that it took the FP users 55 minutes to ride? So they shaved only 20 minutes off the overall wait time by increasing the FP wait time by a good 40 minutes. New math, indeed.

Pre-testing conditions = SB wait of 75 minutes and FP wait of 15 minutes
Testing conditions= SB denied entry and FP wait of 55 minutes

Now that's what I call a successful test!

 

[vacationer1954]

Disney's problems have started primarily with their now almost total focus on the bottom line. They have been ignoring the very successful formula that worked for decades.

They have had almost total focus on the bottom line since Frank Wells died.

 

[grimley1968]

So, let me see if I have this straight... They denied thousands of people the opportunity to ride and the net gain was that it took the FP users 55 minutes to ride? So they shaved only 20 minutes off the overall wait time by increasing the FP wait time by a good 40 minutes. New math, indeed. Pre
-testing conditions = SB wait of 75 minutes and FP wait of 15 minutes Testing conditions= SB denied entry and FP wait of 55 minutes Now that's what I call a successful test!

I guess if we're moving on to the results of the test then that is as good a summary as anything. I hope it was worth the added damage to the Disney brand and extremely unhappy guests.

 

[flicx]

I guess if we're moving on to the results of the test then that is as good a summary as anything. I hope it was worth the added damage to the Disney brand and extremely unhappy guests.

Sadly the damage they do with unhappy guests seems to be of little or no consequence to Disney anymore. These tests have a total disregard for paying customers and their actions on facebook( removing negative feedback) reflect the same almost uncaring arrogance.

 

[flicx]

They have had almost total focus on the bottom line since Frank Wells died.

Then I guess maybe that would be the beginning of the down turn in a lot of peoples eyes.

 

[wisblue]

So, let me see if I have this straight... They denied thousands of people the opportunity to ride and the net gain was that it took the FP users 55 minutes to ride? So they shaved only 20 minutes off the overall wait time by increasing the FP wait time by a good 40 minutes. New math, indeed.

Pre-testing conditions = SB wait of 75 minutes and FP wait of 15 minutes
Testing conditions= SB denied entry and FP wait of 55 minutes

Now that's what I call a successful test!

Somebody reported that they waited 55 minutes some time after the ride had been down for a significant amount of time (like 2 hours). Others have reported that they were on in a couple of minutes.

 

[vacationer1954]

Then I guess maybe that would be the beginning of the down turn in a lot of peoples eyes.

Perhaps, but that was over twenty years ago. How long until the downturn actually happens?

 

[flicx]

Perhaps, but that was over twenty years ago. How long until the downturn actually happens?

Well I didn't realize it was that long ago. I think the downturn happened after Eisner was given the axe. Say what you want about the man he did a lot of construction in the Disney world. I also think he followed the blue print that worked for years much better than the execs running the show now.

 

[vacationer1954]

It seems that every time there is a change in leadership people remember the previous leader as good and the new leader as bad.

 

[Laketravis]

It seems that every time there is a change in leadership people remember the previous leader as good and the new leader as bad.

Not necessarily. It can just as easily go the other way.

 

[over50visits]

I think the disconnect Disney is dealing with is that some, perhaps most, of their customers felt the long standby lines were a perfect example of customer service taking a back seat. Those customers feel FP is a step toward Disney without long lines, and the only thing that would make it better is more fast passes. The only way to add fast passes is to cut down standby. I don't think it was a totally idiotic move to take a slow week and try and eliminate standby all together to see if they could keep the ride at capacity with FP only.

If all their customers were on the same page, they wouldn't have any difficulty deciding what would make them happy. Unfortunately, we all disagree.

Why do they need to keep the ride at capacity?

 

[TheBacklot]

I'm just saying, at 80 pages in, who's going to call it.

 

[Laketravis]

i'm just saying, at 80 pages in, who's going to call it.

Dead horse! Dead horse!

 

[Missyrose]

Why do they need to keep the ride at capacity?

That's the thing, Disney doesn't keep the rides running at capacity year-round.

 

[trainingupmy4princes]

Just a bunch of rules built around data they already have. Not saying they are doing it but they could if they wanted. Not sure what it accomplishes if you don't advertise it as a perk though.
.

I suppose if you had limited FP+ you would have to prioritize which customers to satisfy the most. I suppose then if you had Family A who spent a lot more per trip then Family B and only one could get the A & E FP+ there might be incentive to make A happier and hope B will be happy enough.

 

[Josh Hendy]

I think the reason why this dead horse has been around for 80 pages and is still going strong, is that the autopsy is far from complete and evidently, nobody really knows what the horse died of.

Meaning, it's still very obscure and unclear why this particular test was performed.

Nobody could have possibly believed that a surprise test in the form of a nasty surprise laid on would-be standy riders - at the very moment when they thought they would be entering the queue for TSMM - would be in any way useful, informative, educational, helpful, or especially that it would be cheerfully received.

I'm baffled at the bigger trend that the test seems to indicate. I don't understand how "reservation only" seating would work with rides at a theme park - which despite our love for it, is after all just an expensive and lavishly-designed version of an amusement park or carnival midway ... as if they were scheduling dining on a cruise ship or something.

But even if you COULD make an argument that this is a good way to go, how could anyone possibly think that a "gotcha" surprise is going to be even a tiny bit successful, when the subjects of your test (paying customers) are (a) not informed of the test until it is too late to back out, and (b) have formed their expectations of the way that the queues should work from literally a lifetime of experience at WDW, at amusement parks and midways.

I have only 3 theories ... maybe these should be presented in the form of a poll so you can vote on them, but you would only be guessing anyways unless you've been present at fairly high-level meetings inside the Disney Corp.

1) The decision maker on this test is really out of touch and had no idea that it would baffle and anger a lot of people, especially the would-be standby riders, but also non-park visitors who would naturally hear about this "test" online within minutes or hours, and who would of course mostly get a partial, second-hand version of the events.

2) The decision maker is not out of touch, and knew that this would baffle and anger some of their guests, but thought that a little bit of "tough love" is necessary to kick people out of their rut of old-WDW, old-amusement-park thinking and drag them into the new era of boutique, reservation-only theme park touring. Or else that the bad feelings they would cause during the test are "worth it" for the greater good of getting solid, real-world test data.

3) The decision maker is not out of touch, knew that it would cause ripples of mayhem, but did so deliberately because they're not a fan of the way things are going. They don't have the power to make serious changes to the system, or to gather data with a fair and unbiased survey, but with the limited power they have over one ride or one park they decided to give park visitors a full dose of "this is where FP+ is going" and then let the visitors' complaints speak more eloquently and effectively to upper decision makers than they would ever be allowed to do.

Your guess is as good as mine ...

 

[momof2n2]

I think the reason why this dead horse has been around for 80 pages and is still going strong, is that the autopsy is far from complete and evidently, nobody really knows what the horse died of.

Meaning, it's still very obscure and unclear why this particular test was performed.

Nobody could have possibly believed that a surprise test in the form of a nasty surprise laid on would-be standy riders - at the very moment when they thought they would be entering the queue for TSMM - would be in any way useful, informative, educational, helpful, or especially that it would be cheerfully received.

I'm baffled at the bigger trend that the test seems to indicate. I don't understand how "reservation only" seating would work with rides at a theme park - which despite our love for it, is after all just an expensive and lavishly-designed version of an amusement park or carnival midway ... as if they were scheduling dining on a cruise ship or something.

But even if you COULD make an argument that this is a good way to go, how could anyone possibly think that a "gotcha" surprise is going to be even a tiny bit successful, when the subjects of your test (paying customers) are (a) not informed of the test until it is too late to back out, and (b) have formed their expectations of the way that the queues should work from literally a lifetime of experience at WDW, at amusement parks and midways.

I have only 3 theories ... maybe these should be presented in the form of a poll so you can vote on them, but you would only be guessing anyways unless you've been present at fairly high-level meetings inside the Disney Corp.

1) The decision maker on this test is really out of touch and had no idea that it would baffle and anger a lot of people, especially the would-be standby riders, but also non-park visitors who would naturally hear about this "test" online within minutes or hours, and who would of course mostly get a partial, second-hand version of the events.

2) The decision maker is not out of touch, and knew that this would baffle and anger some of their guests, but thought that a little bit of "tough love" is necessary to kick people out of their rut of old-WDW, old-amusement-park thinking and drag them into the new era of boutique, reservation-only theme park touring. Or else that the bad feelings they would cause during the test are "worth it" for the greater good of getting solid, real-world test data.

3) The decision maker is not out of touch, knew that it would cause ripples of mayhem, but did so deliberately because they're not a fan of the way things are going. They don't have the power to make serious changes to the system, or to gather data with a fair and unbiased survey, but with the limited power they have over one ride or one park they decided to give park visitors a full dose of "this is where FP+ is going" and then let the visitors' complaints speak more eloquently and effectively to upper decision makers than they would ever be allowed to do.

Your guess is as good as mine ...

I don't know which guess is the most accurate, but I think you may have just given this thread and amp of epi. and called for a pacemaker.

 

[grimley1968]

I think the reason why this dead horse has been around for 80 pages and is still going strong, is that the autopsy is far from complete and evidently, nobody really knows what the horse died of. Meaning, it's still very obscure and unclear why this particular test was performed. Nobody could have possibly believed that a surprise test in the form of a nasty surprise laid on would-be standy riders - at the very moment when they thought they would be entering the queue for TSMM - would be in any way useful, informative, educational, helpful, or especially that it would be cheerfully received. I'm baffled at the bigger trend that the test seems to indicate. I don't understand how "reservation only" seating would work with rides at a theme park - which despite our love for it, is after all just an expensive and lavishly-designed version of an amusement park or carnival midway ... as if they were scheduling dining on a cruise ship or something. But even if you COULD make an argument that this is a good way to go, how could anyone possibly think that a "gotcha" surprise is going to be even a tiny bit successful, when the subjects of your test (paying customers) are (a) not informed of the test until it is too late to back out, and (b) have formed their expectations of the way that the queues should work from literally a lifetime of experience at WDW, at amusement parks and midways. I have only 3 theories ... maybe these should be presented in the form of a poll so you can vote on them, but you would only be guessing anyways unless you've been present at fairly high-level meetings inside the Disney Corp. 1) The decision maker on this test is really out of touch and had no idea that it would baffle and anger a lot of people, especially the would-be standby riders, but also non-park visitors who would naturally hear about this "test" online within minutes or hours, and who would of course mostly get a partial, second-hand version of the events. 2) The decision maker is not out of touch, and knew that this would baffle and anger some of their guests, but thought that a little bit of "tough love" is necessary to kick people out of their rut of old-WDW, old-amusement-park thinking and drag them into the new era of boutique, reservation-only theme park touring. Or else that the bad feelings they would cause during the test are "worth it" for the greater good of getting solid, real-world test data. 3) The decision maker is not out of touch, knew that it would cause ripples of mayhem, but did so deliberately because they're not a fan of the way things are going. They don't have the power to make serious changes to the system, or to gather data with a fair and unbiased survey, but with the limited power they have over one ride or one park they decided to give park visitors a full dose of "this is where FP+ is going" and then let the visitors' complaints speak more eloquently and effectively to upper decision makers than they would ever be allowed to do. Your guess is as good as mine ...

Maybe it's a dead horse but this post ensures a zombie afterlife for the thread! I totally agree.