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

[JanaDee]

Not to worry, they are building FP+ lines outside the FP+ line so you can wait in line to get in line.

Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?

 

[MrInfinity]

Just absolutely silly logic to think that family is going to BBB every day and all day long and that they don't care about the attractions.

Nobody said that. I agree it's pretty silly. You're going from extreme to extreme, and saying the BBB guest doesn't want to do some rides. That's not the case. MOST guests are content to do SOME rides. This was proven by FP-. Most guests did not aggressively seek out additional rides... they had magical vacations riding a handful of things in a day, most of which were by standby. They stood in line for hours not knowing there was a better way.

I'm sure Disney has done the math and knows that by getting this vast majority of guests a few fast passes, they will in turn.. spend more, and, get out of the parks quicker, making way for other guests. Both results amount to additional profit.

Also silly to think that people who like to ride attractions don't spend money.

Of course! Go spend your money. Disney is perfectly happy w that. They've just closed the loophole on you riding 7 times via FastPass. While 7 other guests rode via FastPass not at all. Now, you, and 6 other people can all ride via FastPass once! Do you not agree that is great in it's purest form?

They took a feature that was previously used by you, while most people ignored it, and they HANDED it to those other people. That's part of what burns I think... FP- users used to think they were earning their rides by being smarter than the average clueless tourist. Now, smarter doesn't really help you at all.

It's unfortunate that it's worse for those that used to know how to take more, but it's fortunate that it's better for so many. That's just the way it is. Tho you and I will surely wait longer to get on the rides we used to, MOST other ppl who went on much less than you or I, will now be waiting less.

Woohoo right? I get that you don't care what they get on and you'd just as soon they be in standby like before. But from Disney's point of view this is better. Ppl need to accept that what Disney's doing is because it's best for them, not you.

 

[jharaldson]

As for the 1% argument... Wow, how many times does this have to be explained? Disney said in their last report that 50% of the guests took advantage of FP. 50% is not 1%.

I am relatively new here but is there a better breakdown known other than half used them and half didn't? Example:

0 FP- = 50%
1 FP- = 15%
2 FP- = 15%
3 FP- = 10%
4+ FP- = 5%

Has Disney or any other external source collected something like this? Thanks!

 

[White_Sox_Fan]

They took a feature that was previously used by you, while most people ignored it, and they HANDED it to those other people.

Handed to or force fed?

I am relatively new here but is there a better breakdown known other than half used them and half didn't? Example:

0 FP- = 50%
1 FP- = 15%
2 FP- = 15%
3 FP- = 10%
4+ FP- = 5%

Has Disney or any other external source collected something like this? Thanks!

Only Disney has any kind of number regarding FP utilization, an numbers thrown around here are purely speculative and pulled out of our ... well, you know.

 

[lugnut33]

Nobody said that. I agree it's pretty silly. You're going from extreme to extreme, and saying the BBB guest doesn't want to do some rides. That's not the case. MOST guests are content to do SOME rides. This was proven by FP-. Most guests did not aggressively seek out additional rides... they had magical vacations riding a handful of things in a day, most of which were by standby. They stood in line for hours not knowing there was a better way.

I'm sure Disney has done the math and knows that by getting this vast majority of guests a few fast passes, they will in turn.. spend more, and, get out of the parks quicker, making way for other guests. Both results amount to additional profit.



Of course! Go spend your money. Disney is perfectly happy w that. They've just closed the loophole on you riding 7 times via FastPass. While 7 other guests rode via FastPass not at all. Now, you, and 6 other people can all ride via FastPass once! Do you not agree that is great in it's purest form?

They took a feature that was previously used by you, while most people ignored it, and they HANDED it to those other people. That's part of what burns I think... FP- users used to think they were earning their rides by being smarter than the average clueless tourist. Now, smarter doesn't really help you at all.

It's unfortunate that it's worse for those that used to know how to take more, but it's fortunate that it's better for so many. That's just the way it is. Tho you and I will surely wait longer to get on the rides we used to, MOST other ppl who went on much less than you or I, will now be waiting less.

Woohoo right? I get that you don't care what they get on and you'd just as soon they be in standby like before. But from Disney's point of view this is better. Ppl need to accept that what Disney's doing is because it's best for them, not you.

The problem is you've been making making the argument that Disney is happy to lose the multi-time attraction riders when that just isn't the case. Your whole argument is Disney is doing this for the first timers and those who like to mill around and buy coffee and souvenirs and soak up the atmosphere. It allows them to be more happy at the expense of the others who knew how to utilize the system that was being offered. What I'm saying is Disney does NOT want to lose anybody because they know the more people coming through the turnstyles (no matter how they tour the parks) the more money they will bring in.

 

[clsteve]

I am relatively new here but is there a better breakdown known other than half used them and half didn't? Example:

0 FP- = 50%
1 FP- = 15%
2 FP- = 15%
3 FP- = 10%
4+ FP- = 5%

Has Disney or any other external source collected something like this? Thanks!

The FP- system didn't collect any data combining who pulled, how many they pulled and if they used them. Surveys and sampling were all they had. They did know how many were pulled, of course (and who, to some extent), which they could cross reference with estimates of line throughput.

FP+ is the first time they can actually collect all parts of the equation. Well, as long as CM's don't wave people through with Blue Mickey's when it's busy.

Either way, they'll never share the data.

 

[TimothyG]

A note about wait times is that you can't necessarily take them at face value. Disney doesn't actually post the real wait time. They use a formula that's constantly being tweaked in order to provide you with an estimate that is likely higher than the reality.

In other words, the little red card that you get might have made it to the front of the line in 20 minutes, but they may post 30 minutes on the board. Why? They don't want to have you waiting longer than they told you (even though it sometimes happens).

Next time you are handed the little red card, fire up a timer on your phone and see for yourself. You'll see the board change to a higher time than what your phone said.

This makes the comparison from last year's standby time to this year's standby time hard. You are comparing outputs from different formulas.

 

[Planogirl]

Why will so many people be happier and spend more money as a result of this? Were they so unhappy before?

Again, I'll say spend money on what?

 

[MrInfinity]

The problem is you've been making making the argument that Disney is happy to lose the multi-time attraction riders when that just isn't the case. Your whole argument is Disney is doing this for the first timers and those who like to mill around and buy coffee and souvenirs and soak up the atmosphere. It allows them to be more happy at the expense of the others who knew how to utilize the system that was being offered. What I'm saying is Disney does NOT want to lose anybody because they know the more people coming through the turnstyles (no matter how they tour the parks) the more money they will bring in.

I think you understand me, yes. I believe Disney is okay losing a few to gain a bunch. I've also made the case that the few they will lose is VERY few. And I've also made the case that Disney has surely studied this intensely and anticipates exactly the number they believe they will lose -- and they have masses of data on this that supports their business strategy which we are not privy to.

Multi-time attraction riders are simply not as profitable for Disney. When a ride doesn't even have the capacity to get each guest on once per day, why do you feel you should get to go 7 times. Or more accurately, why do you feel Disney shouldn't reallocate your 7 ridings to accommodate 7 guests instead of just you.

 

[WillAustin]

The problem is you've been making making the argument that Disney is happy to lose the multi-time attraction riders when that just isn't the case. Your whole argument is Disney is doing this for the first timers and those who like to mill around and buy coffee and souvenirs and soak up the atmosphere. It allows them to be more happy at the expense of the others who knew how to utilize the system that was being offered. What I'm saying is Disney does NOT want to lose anybody because they know the more people coming through the turnstyles (no matter how they tour the parks) the more money they will bring in.

This should definitely be a better understood point. The parks and resorts aren't full, so losing any loyal customers is a net negative for Disney. The argument that there are always new guests to take the place of the ones that might be lost isn't a sound business strategy and frankly doesn't hold much water anyway.

I also don't think Disney has the data to know exactly what they are doing and how it will shake out. I think a lot of this a more a shot in the dark than many people might believe.

 

[TimothyG]

Why will so many people be happier and spend more money as a result of this? Were they so unhappy before?

Again, I'll say spend money on what?

They covered a lot of this in detail during one of their earnings calls. Management has a strong case to believe that this will result in increased revenue. Probably because they found that guests would be more likely to go to the gift shop or buy popcorn than wait in a long line to do a re-ride.

 

[lugnut33]

I think you understand me, yes. I believe Disney is okay losing a few to gain a bunch. I've also made the case that the few they will lose is VERY few. And I've also made the case that Disney has surely studied this intensely and anticipates exactly the number they believe they will lose -- and they have masses of data on this that supports their business strategy which we are not privy to.

Multi-time attraction riders are simply not as profitable for Disney. When a ride doesn't even have the capacity to get each guest on once per day, why do you feel you should get to go 7 times. Or more accurately, why do you feel Disney shouldn't reallocate your 7 ridings to accommodate 7 guests instead of just you.

Disney sells Annual Passes and that alone nullifies what you just said.

 

[Planogirl]

They covered a lot of this in detail during one of their earnings calls. Management has a strong case to believe that this will result in increased revenue. Probably because they found that guests would be more likely to go to the gift shop or buy popcorn than wait in a long line to do a re-ride.

They have a lot of faith that people will be willing to buy their generic items and overeat don't they?

 

[FlipHipster]

The FP- system didn't collect any data combining who pulled, how many they pulled and if they used them. Surveys and sampling were all they had. They did know how many were pulled, of course (and who, to some extent), which they could cross reference with estimates of line throughput.

FP+ is the first time they can actually collect all parts of the equation. Well, as long as CM's don't wave people through with Blue Mickey's when it's busy.

Either way, they'll never share the data.

Even if we had the numbers, it will just lead to more speculation about why they are what they are. The one thing we don't know is why FP get used or not used. Some people seem to believe that 50% of the guest in the parks are "clueless tourists" who have no idea what they are doing because they didn't pull a FP. In reality they may have decided to wait in a 30 min line for PP rather than return 2 hours later to skip the line. They are touring the way that's most efficient for them even if that means not using a FP.

It seems like some posters are confused by the term "Fast Pass". It is only "Fast" relative to the SB line. You aren't instantly beamed onto the ride because you have a FP. This is the part that I think is tripping so many people up. If the majority of the ride capacity is allocated to FP is it really fast? Not really, they have just moved the line from one side to the other. Its a shell game. In this scenario, the fast past line is now the SB line, there is still going to be a line. Just because you have a reservation to stand in that line doesn't necessarily mean you are going to get on any faster, it depends entirely on how many people have FP for that attraction. True you will get on faster than SB but that's because SB has been allocated a small number of seats on that ride and the other bigger line has priority.

All we can do now is wait and see how Disney achieves a balance that makes the majority happy. They have to figure out a number that allows people to book their rides 60 days out because they told them they could. This number has to be low enough not to turn the FP line into the new reservation based SB line.

Good luck.

 

[lugnut33]

This should definitely be a better understood point. The parks and resorts aren't full, so losing any loyal customers is a net negative for Disney. The argument that there are always new guests to take the place of the ones that might be lost isn't a sound business strategy and frankly doesn't hold much water anyway.

I also don't think Disney has the data to know exactly what they are doing and how it will shake out. I think a lot of this a more a shot in the dark than many people might believe.

Could you see Iger in front of investors saying, "we think it's OK if we lose a certain percentage of our most loyal visitors". Umm, that's just not reality.

 

[mom2rtk]

This should definitely be a better understood point. The parks and resorts aren't full, so losing any loyal customers is a net negative for Disney. The argument that there are always new guests to take the place of the ones that might be lost isn't a sound business strategy and frankly doesn't hold much water anyway.

I also don't think Disney has the data to know exactly what they are doing and how it will shake out. I think a lot of this a more a shot in the dark than many people might believe.

Agreed.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Multi-time attraction riders are simply not as profitable for Disney. When a ride doesn't even have the capacity to get each guest on once per day, why do you feel you should get to go 7 times. Or more accurately, why do you feel Disney shouldn't reallocate your 7 ridings to accommodate 7 guests instead of just you.

Again with the assertion that those who like to ride attractions a lot (whether it's many - not some, many - different ones or the the same one multiple times) must not be spending money. I'd love to know where your facts on that are coming from. There have already been quite a few "Fp optimizers" on this thread who've specifically said that that optimization is what gave them the time to do all of those extras.

Enjoying many rides ≠ not spending money on extra experiences

 

[MrInfinity]

Why will so many people be happier and spend more money as a result of this? Were they so unhappy before?

"People are content so we should stop innovating" is not the best mantra for a company to keep growing...

Nor is "We have this system and only 10% of the visitors are using... but if we change it like this we can leverage it for everyone and increase profits - should we do that?" "No, it's fine how it is some ppl are pretty darn happy that everyone else doesn't use the system and they'll be upset if we make it work for everyone equally." "But... It'll make more money"... "No, really. Leave it alone. Those guests who use FP- REALLY like to ride their rides. In fact, they like it more than other guests. Just ask them - they'll tell you! So what if most guests don't get to ride even once - just leave it alone. As long as our most prized customers can still ride 7 times we're good."

 

[Planogirl]

"People are content so we should stop innovating" is not the best mantra for a company to keep growing...

Nor is "We have this system and only 10% of the visitors are using... but if we change it like this we can leverage it for everyone and increase profits - should we do that?" "No, it's fine how it is some ppl are pretty darn happy that everyone else doesn't use the system and they'll be upset if we make it work for everyone equally." "But... It'll make more money"... "No, really. Leave it alone. Those guests who use FP- REALLY like to ride their rides. In fact, they like it more than other guests. Just ask them - they'll tell you! So what if most guests don't get to ride even once - just leave it alone. As long as our most prized customers can still ride 7 times we're good."

If you're going to pull numbers out of the air, at least throw in those that people seem to accept as reality. 50% not 10%.

Also, there is nothing wrong with new technology and improvement. However the mantra that apparently so many people were so miserable because they had to wait in line when the parks are always packed hence the lines seems a big illogical. I wouldn't go back to a place that made me so unhappy and I doubt that I'm a freak of nature for feeling that way. Clearly the parks are busy so it appears that people have been happy for a while. Making them even more happy is nice but I doubt that that has much to do with Disney's goals.

 

[FlipHipster]

If you're going to pull numbers out of the air, at least throw in those that people seem to accept as reality. 50% not 10%.

Also, there is nothing wrong with new technology and improvement. However the mantra that apparently so many people were so miserable because they had to wait in line when the parks are always packed hence the lines seems a big illogical. I wouldn't go back to a place that made me so unhappy and I doubt that I'm a freak of nature for feeling that way. Clearly the parks are busy so it appears that people have been happy for a while. Making them even more happy is nice but I doubt that that has much to do with Disney's goals.

Very true. All one has to do is look at wait times during peak seasons to realize that park goers are willing to stand in some awfully long lines to get on their favorite rides. The ability to leave those lines and go spend money has always been there but they prioritized riding over spending. I think its a stretch to say guests will be happy when told, "Sorry you can't get on Soarin' because you didn't book it 2 months ago. Here's a FP for Cpt. EO now go spend some money with all the free time you now have."