*** Updated to add spring break Data*** New Data, FP+ impacting wait times, discuss

[Angel Ariel]

and I apologized for not understanding his point.

you think this person will apologize for not understanding I was specifically talking about popular rides on presidents day when he accused me of cherry picking data due to an agenda?

That accusation has happened on both sides of this discussion today, and I haven't seen anyone else apologize for it.

I can't (and won't) even try to predict what someone else will do.

 

[DividedSky]

Just as it is your opinion that FP- was scrapped because of negative feedback.

I said that? where?

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Exactly. From now on until they decide they are no longer in the testing phase, you can't make any assumptions. People are better off selecting FPs and adjusting their touring plans when they are closer to their actual arrival dates. But I would probably select something 60 days out just to have it there in case those FPs aren't available later.

This is what I'm planning on doing. Make reservation 60 days out, check in every now and then to see if any significant changes to the system are made, and then adjust if they have.

I don't believe that is the agenda they are talking about.

The agenda is that many people on these boards were not in favor of FP Plus from the begining because it detracts from some of the advantages WE enjoyed under the old system.

They cherry pick data that supports their agenda (but does not really mean what they think it means) and try and support the conclussion that FP+ is a disaster and/or needs to be scrapped.

Many of these people (not all) believe that if they complain enough about it on internet message boards that Disney will go back to the old system (that's just not happening).

I totally agree the changes in STBY wait times need to be factored into touring plans. I'm sure Josh and the folks at TP are hard at work figuring this stuff out.

I will say that "first-hand" reports on internet message boards are about the most un-reliable indicators you could depend on.

Your comment earlier that went something like "Even more important than Josh's data is first hand reports we are seeing from the parks" actually made me laugh out loud

I've seen on here for years anecdotes about "the parks are way more crowded now then they ever were in the last 30 years" = not true

"People are going to stop eating at Disney because food quality is down and prices are up" = not true

"I know for a fact people are not spending as much on shopping at Disney any more because my cousin's wife's brother at Disney usually spends $800 and this year on their 15th trip they only spent $200" = means nothing because merchandise sales are up over 60% in the last decade.

When it comes down to it you either have an agenda or you do not whether someone labels you with it or not.

In my case I prefered the old system the way it was because it benefited my family. I did tons of research and was able to exploit ineficiency in the system to my advantage. If I had to pick I would pick the old system and milk ever ounce of fun I could out of my vacation.

At the same time I understand the science of queueing and what Disney is tryig to do. I understand that under a more efficient queueing system some people are going to benefit less (my family) but most are going to benefit more. I also understand internet message boards for Disney experts and social media are not representative of the whole.

Many people on here either don't understand these concepts or they just refuse to admit them because the outcome does not benefit them.

A duck is a duck even if no one "labels" it as such.

When sampling you will get the most accurate results from sampling the largest pool and completely dis-regarding any "self-selectors".

Using anecdotes from a message board is like buying a car because Aunt Suzie says it is a great car and not using the extensive data and research put out by Consumer Reports.

So glad you joined in here, NavyDad. I feel like I'm re-reading some of my own posts from months ago... And I am in the same bucket as well: had the old system working for us, recognize what Disney is trying to do, am ready to adjust accordingly and make the most of the new system. I still hope that they make some changes, though...

 

[WillAustin]

MM+ including FP+ was patented as both an information gathering tool and a crowd management tool. Disney fully expected the system to pay for itself through higher per guest spending, efficiencies in staffing, and increased attendance due to "locking" guests into onsite plans.

Defintely, and there are several points of evidence and statements directly from Disney to support these reasons for the changes. There hasn't been any evidence or statements supporting anything having to do with addressing any FP- complaints or a desire to make anything "more fair."

 

[redrosesix]

I'm not saying RD won't continue to be an effective strategy - it might, but there are definitely changes to that strategy (as you noted ).

But at this point, we also have offsite guests hitting FP+ kiosks right at RD, since they have no earlier access. If/when they get earlier access, it could very well change (again) how the lines are building at RD.

Agreed. And since they'll be able to book in adv, many people may actually choose the 9-10 slots that they couldn't this year (since they were in line at a kiosk at the time).

I think a lot will depend on if/when the fp's for particular rides are gone -- and what people choose to select if so. Or maybe they'll decide not to go to the park if they can't get a fp for TSMM, and will choose another day.

So happy I don't work for Disney right now -- the more I think about the SB/FP return line issue the more I see the problem with the FP return line having priority.

 

[agavegirl1]

Defintely, and there are several points of evidence and statements directly from Disney to support these reasons for the changes. There hasn't been any evidence or statements supporting anything having to do with addressing any FP- complaints or a desire to make anything "more fair."

Since I don't have a "like" button, I'll just quote you WillAustin.

 

[Mad Hattered]

not with you I don't.

I didn't think so. You have a thing for non-transferable everything.

 

[NavyDad]

This. It was in the literature for the original patent for FP+. It's what should be happening.



We ie. the people discussing the report, were discussing the secondary attractions as well. That you could show wait times for Tier 1 rides went down is actually proving Josh's point, as per what Navy Dad posted -- it's the goal of the sytem. The fact that you showed that SB wait times for four Tier 1 rides doesn't refute the other data on SB times for rides throughout the park.

Right there is the "tick" that makes the whole system "tock".

It was never a healthy state for Disney to have a few rides with super long waits while a bunch of secondary rides had little to no wait.

Just like it was never healthy for Disney to have have a few guests use 5-7 FP a day while many only used less than 3 if they even used any at all. (It worked out great for my family though for sure)

I haven't seen their data but I have seen data on a couple of grocery chains. This is just an informed guess but I would be willing to bet that Disney has a "sweet spot" of maximized revenue based on park attendence and how that attendence is spread thru the day and through the park.

If they can get a greater majority (not the uber-informed minority) to move thru the parks more efficiently and get that same majority to spend less total time standing in line (the STBY line on particular rides is not an indicator of this), it keeps them in that "sweet spot" longer each day.

This really is a fundamental change in how crowds will behave and YES it is very important that we are aware of it and plan for it.

Having many more people using the virtual queue (FP) and having less people stand in a First in First out (STBY) will actually increase the STBY line on some rides and the FP line on some others. However, (this may sound counter-intuitive to some) will actually reduce the total time in line for the entire guest population AND spread that line standing time around more evenly.

and YES this could very well be a bad thing for many of us on these boards...

 

[redrosesix]

Right there is the "tick" that makes the whole system "tock".

It was never a healthy state for Disney to have a few rides with super long waits while a bunch of secondary rides had little to no wait.

Just like it was never healthy for Disney to have have a few guests use 5-7 FP a day while many only used less than 3 if they even used any at all. (It worked out great for my family though for sure)

I haven't seen their data but I have seen data on a couple of grocery chains. This is just an informed guess but I would be willing to bet that Disney has a "sweet spot" of maximized revenue based on park attendence and how that attendence is spread thru the day and through the park.

If they can get a greater majority (not the uber-informed minority) to move thru the parks more efficiently and get that same majority to spend less total time standing in line (the STBY line on particular rides is not an indicator of this), it keeps them in that "sweet spot" longer each day.

This really is a fundamental change in how crowds will behave and YES it is very important that we are aware of it and plan for it.

Having many more people using the virtual queue (FP) and having less people stand in a First in First out (STBY) will actually increase the STBY line on some rides and the FP line on some others. However, (this may sound counter-intuitive to some) will actually reduce the total time in line for the entire guest population AND spread that line standing time around more evenly.

and YES this could very well be a bad thing for many of us on these boards...

Now... if we could only get them to upgrade those secondary rides so that the time spent waiting in line for them was more worth it.

I agree with all of this, but there is still an underlying problem with the system. It's obvious it's not working as designed given the "temporary" roped off queues before the FP return line and the number of CMs they are apparently using just to get everyone into the right lines. I don't think we'll really know how well or how badly the FP system works until these issues are resolved, along with the infrastructure issues including inadequate wifi in the parks. Half our our time in each of the FP return lines was spent in those roped off queues -- not the interesting, themed queues within the attractions. So without that, our total wait time on each park day would be about half an hour less.

 

[*disgal*]

From September to December there were plenty of trip/FP+ reports that said "FP+ is awesome! Between it and FP- we rode TSMM four times!!! great job Disney!" Very few people seem to get what they were testing and what it would be like without the legacy system. Remember that when Disney says that most of their feedback has been positive.

Ha! Yeah. That actually was my first thought.

Do you REALLY want to go there?

 

[surferdave]

So the old system is changed because they were looking to improve on areas that need improvement, but the new survey is proof that the complaints vastly outnumber the positive responses.

That's not even remotely what I said. You're arguing with so many people on so many fronts you can't keep your counterpoints straight.

 

[Silock]

Look, people can throw out all the numbers about average wait times going down all they want, but when I KNOW that I was not able to do the same number of attractions and waited in more, longer lines, it really doesn't mean much.

My experience trumps numbers. It sucked. It was not as good. Period.

 

[NavyDad]

Now... if we could only get them to upgrade those secondary rides so that the time spent waiting in line for them was more worth it.

I agree with all of this, but there is still an underlying problem with the system. It's obvious it's not working as designed given the "temporary" roped off queues before the FP return line and the number of CMs they are apparently using just to get everyone into the right lines. I don't think we'll really know how well or how badly the FP system works until these issues are resolved, along with the infrastructure issues including inadequate wifi in the parks. Half our our time in each of the FP return lines was spent in those roped off queues -- not the interesting, themed queues within the attractions. So without that, our total wait time on each park day would be about half an hour less.

Those are good points.

I'm sure the sytstem will and should be improved. Some of that stuff just needs to be worked thru. I have seen time and again where equipment tests out great in the lab and then when it's used in the field unforseen things happen. At some point you have to move from the testing phase to the transition phase. That's where I think we are right now.

I think the goal is to have the kinks worked out before more capacity comes on line at the two under-performing parks: AK and then DHS.

We'll see....

 

[NavyDad]

Look, people can throw out all the numbers about average wait times going down all they want, but when I KNOW that I was not able to do the same number of attractions and waited in more, longer lines, it really doesn't mean much.

My experience trumps numbers. It sucked. It was not as good. Period.

I'm sorry to hear that. I am glad you are being honest though.....

 

[Shaden]

I looked at Presidents day weekend and touring plans reported wait times

For 2013, I used Saturday 2/16

For 2014, I used Saturday 2/15

Space Mtn
2013 – 95 minutes
2014 – 53 minutes

BTMRR
2013 – 68
2014 – 51

Peter Pan
2013 – 95
2014 – 61

Haunted Mansion
2013 - 40
2014 - 27

President’s day weekend was way busier in 2013 and the lines were longer. I do remember people complaining about how much longer the waits were (because of fp+), and I think an agenda has much to do with it as the waits were actually shorter because the park wasn't as busy as the year before.

And we cherry pick ... so wonderfully.

 

[DividedSky]

And we cherry pick ... so wonderfully.

what was cherry picked?

 

[JDUCKY]

Josh's data suggested many of the headliners had similar or even lower STBY times while many secondary rides have had higher STBY times. These numbers will continue to fluctuate as they tweak the system but it appears to me the system is working exactly as it was intended. (not including anecdotes and cherry-picking)

But what headliners dropped in times? Esp. in times that are more than negligible?

Looking at the easywdw page from the OP's link doesn't show that. EE was the same on median, up on peak. KS was up on both. Soarin was the same on median, down slightly on peak. TT was up on median, down slightly on peak. RnRC up on median, same on peak. ToT up on both. TSMM unchanged on both. SpaceMtn down a bit on one, up a bit on the other. Peter Pan down a bit on median, same on peak.

Sorry...not seeing where headliners are dropping in wait times.


And, as to those dismissing the comparison of the Presidents' Day times from last year vs. this year are ignoring one major thing that happened early in 2013 that increased attendance in the MK: the FL expansion including ETWB and UTS-JOTLM and the new BOG restaurant. The newness has somewhat worn off (esp. of the new Mermaid ride...it's quite lame considering what Disney is capable of doing)

 

[WillAustin]

Sorry...not seeing where headliners are dropping in wait times.

When I looked the other day, I think there were only 2 headliners that had shorter median waits. As I posted in a different thread, based on those numbers, waits for the headliners generally are still long, and the waits for secondary attractions are longer than they were before.

I'm not buying into the idea that because FP+ is spread among more people the median overall total wait in a day(FP+ or not) per rider is significantly less than before.

 

[Planogirl]

Funny you should use that particular date, because I was there for both of them that night. It was extremely cold last year, and close to freezing that night -- my daughter was in the Twirlmania parade and it was so cold they had to put them up in the CMs dressing rooms before the parade. So the parks were super crowded during the day that weekend and much much better at night.

So you're saying other people have an agenda, yet you only showed 4 rides -- all rides that had longer reported SB times last year on one particular day -- what about all the other rides in MK? And you use one day -- yet Josh's data is over 60 days. We rode PoTC right after the parade both years because that's the gate where we pick the girls up -- after 10 pm last year the SB wait was only 10 minutes, which we figured was kind of long because it was an indoor ride and nobody wanted to be outside. This year it was 20 minutes but we used a FP, as did a lot of the families who were affiliated with the parade -- I actually don't know how long people got stuck in SB because of us So there are two things that can throw your data off if you only look at one day.

Btw, it was so cold that night that I had to scrape the ice off my windshield the next morning.

Cold weather can certainly make a difference when it comes to line length. I've dealt with that myself. That makes the comparisons very questionable IMO.

 

[MrInfinity]

Look, people can throw out all the numbers about average wait times going down all they want, but when I KNOW that I was not able to do the same number of attractions and waited in more, longer lines, it really doesn't mean much.

That matters a ton. Because you got to go on significantly less, more other ppl got to go on a little more. It's not like the rides just started servicing fewer ppl. The same number of ppl are getting on the ride... it's just less you and more other ppl. It's a transition from a few ppl utilizing a big benefit to many ppl utilizing a smaller benefit.