TSM standby-less test Oct. 6-9

[surferdave]

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.

That's it.

WDW decision maker would probably like to get out of the amusement park business entirely if they could. Ideally they'd like to fill the high end resorts with guests who think coming to the mid Florida swamps to lounge by a pool or play golf all day at a big premium is a swell idea and fill the budget resorts with international teens on their coming of age journeys, with credit cards in hand and an express ride to Disney Springs to load them up. The old school WDW tourist who sleeps in the moderate resorts (not gonna build any more of those!) and stays in the parks all day enjoying attractions is a drag on the model.

But for the time being, everyone still expects to spend a lot of time in the parks. So while they work diligently to shift the expectations of the guests on a macro level (like insisting in the commercials that the resorts are the best part of the trip) they can at least change the park expectations to less attractions, more dining and shopping.

 

[MAGICFOR2]

That's it.

WDW decision maker would probably like to get out of the amusement park business entirely if they could. Ideally they'd like to fill the high end resorts with guests who think coming to the mid Florida swamps to lounge by a pool or play golf all day at a big premium is a swell idea and fill the budget resorts with international teens on their coming of age journeys, with credit cards in hand and an express ride to Disney Springs to load them up. The old school WDW tourist who sleeps in the moderate resorts (not gonna build any more of those!) and stays in the parks all day enjoying attractions is a drag on the model.

But for the time being, everyone still expects to spend a lot of time in the parks. So while they work diligently to shift the expectations of the guests on a macro level (like insisting in the commercials that the resorts are the best part of the trip) they can at least change the park expectations to less attractions, more dining and shopping.

This. Why build more attractions? Just convince the guests that when they can't do what they came to do it is way more fun to go back and sit by the pool! I have even had people on this board suggest that to me.

 

[JanaDee]

That's it.

WDW decision maker would probably like to get out of the amusement park business entirely if they could. Ideally they'd like to fill the high end resorts with guests who think coming to the mid Florida swamps to lounge by a pool or play golf all day at a big premium is a swell idea and fill the budget resorts with international teens on their coming of age journeys, with credit cards in hand and an express ride to Disney Springs to load them up. The old school WDW tourist who sleeps in the moderate resorts (not gonna build any more of those!) and stays in the parks all day enjoying attractions is a drag on the model.

But for the time being, everyone still expects to spend a lot of time in the parks. So while they work diligently to shift the expectations of the guests on a macro level (like insisting in the commercials that the resorts are the best part of the trip) they can at least change the park expectations to less attractions, more dining and shopping.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that has noticed the shifts in the commercials.

 

[Sandy321]

oh and look, TLC is running the Disney Undiscovered, and other attraction/shows... how many of these rides are gone?

last hour, "what would Walt say" he'd probably say "what took you so long?"

oh well, I'll still be entertained till noon today! (If not a bit sad, and nostalgic)

 

[ArwenMarie]

That's it.
WDW decision maker would probably like to get out of the amusement park business entirely if they could. Ideally they'd like to fill the high end resorts with guests who think coming to the mid Florida swamps to lounge by a pool or play golf all day at a big premium is a swell idea and fill the budget resorts with international teens on their coming of age journeys, with credit cards in hand and an express ride to Disney Springs to load them up. The old school WDW tourist who sleeps in the moderate resorts (not gonna build any more of those!) and stays in the parks all day enjoying attractions is a drag on the model.

But for the time being, everyone still expects to spend a lot of time in the parks. So while they work diligently to shift the expectations of the guests on a macro level (like insisting in the commercials that the resorts are the best part of the trip) they can at least change the park expectations to less attractions, more dining and shopping.

Yep, now they are forcing this in a sense. Anything to not have to build more rides.

There is no reason to come to Orlando as a tourist, for most folks, other than the parks. The weather stinks for much of the year, the terrain is flat and boring, and it's not near the ocean. In a thought experiment, let's say all of the parks in Orlando shut down for some reason. How many tourists would still go there?

If you want to go a resort and sit around and swim and golf, you can do that near your home for a lot less. Or you can go somewhere else in Florida or the Carribbean where you will also be near the ocean. If international people want to shop, there are also many more interesting cities to do that in as well.

 

[FlipHipster]

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.

FP+ was intended to provide a very personalized experience. That's why a lot of the "I got one" threads are going to be frustrating for a lot of people. It's no longer as easy as "insert ticket, retrieve your FP".

Just an example, one of several.

[0051] By way of another example, guest business rules 112 may include differing rules depending on who the guest is, how many people are in the guest's party, the ages of the members of the guest's party, whether there are records that the guest has visited certain experience areas 22 or experiences 18 in the past, whether past records indicate that the guest desires to see certain characters at a specific experience area 22, eat at certain restaurants, etc. Additional types and kinds of business rules 112 may also be applied to achieve a desired strategy for the guest's visit in other embodiments.

Stay at certain resorts, etc.

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph...srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=20130018661.PGNR.

 

[indimom3]

My personal opinion on this test is that it's not done with sinister motives. I think it's exactly the sort of thing a very arrogant corporate culture decides to do. They did it because they wanted to do it. They wanted some piece of information and just picked a week to go and get it, without considering the individual guest impact very much.
We have figured out that they definitely released additional FP throughout the day, even after the sandwich board signs went up claiming it had reached capacity. I believe, and others believe, that they did this to make sure that people who arrived at the park later in the day could still ride at least once, after going to the kiosk for a FP. They were trying to allow everyone to ride one time, and I think that was a big part of the test. To see if they could do that.

Along the way, they lied to lot of people. Because they wanted to. Because it was part of their test. How late in the day can we manage to have someone walk through the turnstiles and still get a FP? How long does it take to recover from a breakdown?

And what about the disabled access line? There were at least ten people in that line when we went through. I bet their wait was long. Longer than normal, probably. I didn't see a single person move out of the line as we waited in the over pass. I think they were testing that as well.

My guess, for the next test, is that they allow each guest a single FP on whatever ride they test. I think that's what they will do on the mine train or whatever ride they test next. To prep for the ridiculous crowd that will hit Norway?

 

[cakebaker]

It's been a gradual shift that's been coming for a very long time-
The off site, here just for the thrill rides guest is not Disney's target guest anymore- hasn't been for a long time, if it ever was.

We go for the whole experience. We enjoy the rides, but we don't need to ride them a dozen times. In fact, we make a point of riding some only once. Peter Pan's flight is my #1 ride to ride ( yeah, it's true). We ride it once. It wouldn't be special if we rode it a dozen times.

It would've been nice to ride SDMT more than once because my grandson got his first roller coaster experience this trip and loved it and there's just not many rides for an adventurous 2 year old. Then again, there's not a lot of adventurous 2 year olds, so understandable. It's cute now, but I fear he may well not be a WDW lifetime fan. But he survived, and he can ride coasters at home.

I think it's very clear Disney is moving to a destination that is more than just a theme park experience- their resorts have so much to offer that just gets a glance by a lot of people that you could literally, never leave the resort and have a wonderful vacation.

This does leave the off site guest and/or those who come just for the rides out in the cold. But I don't think Disney was ever your best choice. It's so much more than just rides and if the "more" isn't your cup of tea, neither is Disney.

 

[flicx]

The good old days when Disney valued customers over profit never existed. It's a pixie dust myth.

Profits and customer satisfaction go hand in hand. Disney doesn't do, nor has it ever done, what it does to make the customer happy. They do it to make a profit and have a successful company. Making the customer happy gives them their profit so of course customer satisfaction is important. But it's an important part of making a profit- not their end goal.

Yes, you read these boards or facebook and you'd have to wonder what ARE they thinking- but then you look at the crowds- the competition just to get a table so you can give them more of your money- and you have to say- Whatever they're doing- they're doing enough right that people are inundating the parks all year long.

Is it as good as it was 20 years ago? I don't think so, but it's apparently good enough.

Time will tell if they can keep up the pace, but nothing yet says it's hurting them and fp+ has been in place for enough time it should've shown at least some backlash. It hasn't.

Sorry you see things in a total different light than many of us do. Disney used to make customers their primary focus, and the profits took care of themselves. Now it is very clear that they feel they can just do whatever to paying customers and not worry more of them will replace them. There are so many examples of this and these tests are just another one! Don't be so sure that Disney isn't starting to feel some backlash from recent debacles with MME. I have noticed the past six months resort discounts are creeping back up. Of course Disney never releases true attendance numbers so it will be a few years til we have the answer. I'll say this, if facebook and the Disney fan sites are any indicator of trends, they could soon see some financial woes.

 

[cakebaker]

If you want to go a resort and sit around and swim and golf, you can do that near your home for a lot less.

Absolutely! But where can you do both? They aren't eliminating the parks- they're trying to make them not the ONLY thing.

 

[tj4disney]

I'm glad I'm not the only one that has noticed the shifts in the commercials.

Yeah, the shift to resorts in commercials is interesting.

Regarding the parks experience, I have a picture in my head that Disney's utopian goal would be to have 30,000 people distributed evenly across a park, and everybody would just move from one thing to the next in an orderly, clockwise direction...maybe they could even create those people movers like in the movie Wall-E. That way they could say that 100% of their guests can experience 100% of attractions (once) with less than a 10 minute wait. No long lines...everybody gets to see everything...what could possibly be better??

Of course, that eliminates the many of us here who don't want to tour like that. But there are some on the Boards who apparently wouldn't mind. From general observation, it seems as those the "many" significantly outweigh the "some". But forget about those of us currently on the Dis for a minute. My question is whether the even many more "out there" that attend the parks would find Disney utopia to be palatable?? Maybe for first timers that sounds pretty good, but would they find that utopia fulfilling to want to keep returning? If the proportion of future Disney-goers is near the proportion of us here on the Boards, return customers goes down significantly. So then the question is whether there's just an endless supply of first timers in the spigot? Not sure how tenable that is, but seems like that's a large part of the play here.

 

[minnie-apple-mouse]

Yep, now they are forcing this in a sense. Anything to not have to build more rides.

There is no reason to come to Orlando as a tourist, for most folks, other than the parks. The weather stinks for much of the year, the terrain is flat and boring, and it's not near the ocean. In a thought experiment, let's say all of the parks in Orlando shut down for some reason. How many tourists would still go there?

If you want to go a resort and sit around and swim and golf, you can do that near your home for a lot less. Or you can go somewhere else in Florida or the Carribbean where you will also be near the ocean. If international people want to shop, there are also many more interesting cities to do that in as well.

Absolutely! But where can you do both? They aren't eliminating the parks- they're trying to make them not the ONLY thing.

The question is how many would go there if your park access was reduced to maybe half (like 6 or 7 hours a day) and you select the window to fit your needs, and that window has your FP+ scheduled.

Its unlikely all of us guests go to the parks from 7AM to 10PM every day. Probably more likely about 1/3 mornings, 1/3 afternoons and 1/3 evenings (with a mix doing am and then back for the evening).

They may be looking for the best solution to appease all categories. That 1/3 ( maybe 50%) that go in the afternoon (arrive after lunch) most likely value FP+ higher, especially busier weeks.

The gamble is how many of us 1/3 will go away, and how many of the other half will now be attracted back. My guess is most of us 1/3 are hooked lifers, 1/3 will always be noobies, and another percent of 1/3 will have interest peaked and come back. The dads that golf and hate lines will now go to the MK Mountains with minimal wait late afternoon or evening for example.

 

[ArwenMarie]

I think it's very clear Disney is moving to a destination that is more than just a theme park experience- their resorts have so much to offer that just gets a glance by a lot of people that you could literally, never leave the resort and have a wonderful vacation.

This does leave the off site guest and/or those who come just for the rides out in the cold. But I don't think Disney was ever your best choice. It's so much more than just rides and if the "more" isn't your cup of tea, neither is Disney.

See, I don't think their resorts are that great. People enjoy them, don't get me wrong. But there are far more interesting places and resorts to visit in the U.S. if you take the parks out of the equation.

I'm curious. What do you see that is so great and unique in the Disney Resorts that you think they can be a vacation in and of themselves, versus any other resort in the U.S.?

 

[Missyrose]

See, I don't think their resorts are that great. People enjoy them, don't get me wrong. But there are far more interesting places and resorts to visit in the U.S. if you take the parks out of the equation.

I'm curious. What do you see that is so great and unique in the Disney Resorts that you think they can be a vacation in and of themselves, versus any other resort in the U.S.?

I happen to really love spending time at Disney resorts, but I understand where you're coming from. I do think Disney is really pushing the idea of "exploring the whole Walt Disney World Resort" on people's trips. On the TV special about Disney resorts, there was a segment on MM+. In it, we're told that making FP+ reservations in advance frees up time for us to "really enjoy your vacations." That sentence is laid over video of families at resort pools, dining at resort restaurants, shopping at DTD and going down a slide a one of the waterparks.

Disney clearly wants people to move beyond just the four major theme parks on their trip. And I don't think there's any putting the toothpaste back in the tube on this one.

 

[mom2mickeyfan]

See, I don't think their resorts are that great. People enjoy them, don't get me wrong. But there are far more interesting places and resorts to visit in the U.S. if you take the parks out of the equation.

I'm curious. What do you see that is so great and unique in the Disney Resorts that you think they can be a vacation in and of themselves, versus any other resort in the U.S.?

I wonder the same thing because I hear all the time on DIS that the resorts aren't worth the money Disney charges for them and they need to add more perks. We have stayed at many different time shares in the Orlando area and usually visit 1 or 2 Disney resorts every year and besides the lobby area, I don't see anything that would make me pick staying at one of those instead of our time share especially after I hear about the size of the rooms. I mean we have a full kitchen, full living room area, 1 or 2 bedroom, 1 or 2 bathrooms and a pool area that is just as nice and sometimes better than Disney resorts for much less than. And this is in the Orlando area. Travel to some real resort areas and there are some very awesome resorts out there!!

 

[minnie-apple-mouse]

See, I don't think their resorts are that great. People enjoy them, don't get me wrong. But there are far more interesting places and resorts to visit in the U.S. if you take the parks out of the equation.

I'm curious. What do you see that is so great and unique in the Disney Resorts that you think they can be a vacation in and of themselves, versus any other resort in the U.S.?

If I can add, I agree, but what is unique is the parks. Why would you take them out of the equation even if you are just visiting them 4 to 6 hours a day?

Give any example of resorts, or golf course areas, or beaches-and then put the WDW parks within walking distance, but with FP+ (reducing the best headliner windows, but also reserving them) and then decide which one you would use your one week a year off at.

 

[ArwenMarie]

I happen to really love spending time at Disney resorts, but I understand where you're coming from. I do think Disney is really pushing the idea of "exploring the whole Walt Disney World Resort" on people's trips. On the TV special about Disney resorts, there was a segment on MM+. In it, we're told that making FP+ reservations in advance frees up time for us to "really enjoy your vacations." That sentence is laid over video of families at resort pools, dining at resort restaurants, shopping at DTD and going down a slide a one of the waterparks.

Disney clearly wants people to move beyond just the four major theme parks on their trip. And I don't think there's any putting the toothpaste back in the tube on this one.

I agree, I think the time at the resorts can be fun and relaxing. But I don't think that's a Disney Resort thing, that could be found at hundreds of other resorts across the country. People come for the parks.

But you are right. People with either adjust to the new way or they will find other places to go on vacation.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I don't think marketing resorts is new. They have always marketed resorts. I remember the brochures my mom used to order in the early 80s. I so badly wanted to go to the resorts. The families looked so happy.

 

[mom2mickeyfan]

I happen to really love spending time at Disney resorts, but I understand where you're coming from. I do think Disney is really pushing the idea of "exploring the whole Walt Disney World Resort" on people's trips. On the TV special about Disney resorts, there was a segment on MM+. In it, we're told that making FP+ reservations in advance frees up time for us to "really enjoy your vacations." That sentence is laid over video of families at resort pools, dining at resort restaurants, shopping at DTD and going down a slide a one of the waterparks.

Disney clearly wants people to move beyond just the four major theme parks on their trip. And I don't think there's any putting the toothpaste back in the tube on this one.

So it is like Disney decided to build these really cool parks to draw people to Orlando and it has worked very good. Now instead of making the parks better to handle all of these people, they are looking for ways to get these people out of the parks. "Come visit our cool parks that cost alot of money, spend only a few hours and then get out so that we can get more people in" But since they don't have enough rooms to supply the parks with all the guest they need, it is crazy idea that they aren't worried about pleasing the off-site guest at all. Too me, the reason Disney stated they started with fp+ was to lock guest into their parks before leaving home. If that isn't targeted at off-site guest, I'm not sure what is. You have to admit that if you pay so much to stay at a Disney resort and get them to pick you up at the air port, you are probably going to be a good bit of your time at a Disney resort. It is those off-site guest that they need to run their parks that they have to worry about seeing all the cool signs for those other Orlando parks and decide to check those out instead of Disney. If those guest have already bought Disney tickets to book fp+s, then more than likely, they are going to be spending their time in Disney parks.

 

[ArwenMarie]

I wonder the same thing because I hear all the time on DIS that the resorts aren't worth the money Disney charges for them and they need to add more perks. We have stayed at many different time shares in the Orlando area and usually visit 1 or 2 Disney resorts every year and besides the lobby area, I don't see anything that would make me pick staying at one of those instead of our time share especially after I hear about the size of the rooms. I mean we have a full kitchen, full living room area, 1 or 2 bedroom, 1 or 2 bathrooms and a pool area that is just as nice and sometimes better than Disney resorts for much less than. And this is in the Orlando area. Travel to some real resort areas and there are some very awesome resorts out there!!

Exactly. The Disney Resorts are fine, but there isn't anything wildly special about them, other than being in proximity to the parks and having that feeling of the bubble.

If I can add, I agree, but what is unique is the parks. Why would you take them out of the equation even if you are just visiting them 4 to 6 hours a day?

Give any example of resorts, or golf course areas, or beaches-and then put the WDW parks within walking distance, but with FP+ (reducing the best headliner windows, but also reserving them) and then decide which one you would use your one week a year off at.

I agree. If someone thinks it is an enjoyable vacation to spend 4-6 hours at the parks plus a bunch of other stuff (swimming, shopping, mini golf, waterparks, golf, etc), then it is still a great choice as a vacation. Absolutely.

For me, when I take the cost into consideration, especially considering airfare , 4-6 hours at the parks starts to seem a bit too expensive. I can do everything else Disney/Orlando offers somewhere else, for either less money or with added features like being near the ocean, a better climate, more beautiful terrain, etc.