X-Pass attraction list

[doconeill]

Yep! That's how I see it....and Iger is only concerned with the bottom line.

Well, technically that's his job...

 

[nytimez]

Well, technically that's his job...

There are different ways to go about it. You can focus relentlessly on the next quarter like a dog chasing its tail or you can take the long view.

Iger does not take the long view. But, not many CEOs do anymore.

 

[RobDIS]

Yeesh, hope this doesn't turn into something where you not only have to plan most of your meal times 6 months in advance, but also most of your rides.

 

[doconeill]

There are different ways to go about it. You can focus relentlessly on the next quarter like a dog chasing its tail or you can take the long view.

Iger does not take the long view. But, not many CEOs do anymore.

I think he's started to, with things like FLE and such...at least more so than anyone has done in the past 10 years or so. Not necessarily how most people would have liked it, either...

But with the rise in things like shareholder lawsuits, etc. most CEOs seem to have to play the "what can I do next quarter?" game. And when you deal with a giant megacorp with so many divisions, many of which lose money, you have to "rob from the rich" as someone once said...

It may not have been the worst thing if they had sold/spun off the parks...

 

[KellyNY]

I agree that we don't have enough info yet to judge this in its entirety.

But when I hear things like "if you don't like you can just do what you did before", I cringe. Disney is spending a LOT of money on this system. They are going to expect a significant return on their investment. This means 1, it will need to have a price tag associated with it, and 2, it will need to provide a strong benefit to justify that price tag.

This mean xpass users are going to have to have it a lot better than the rest of the guests, and that means everybody else is going to be worse off. Fewer FPs available, longer standby lines, etc. The only real question is how big the impact will be. So I don't think it's fair to just say "if you don't like it don't use it". Those guests are going to be negatively impacted and therefore have a right to express their displeasure.

At least that's how I see it.

Obviously anyone has rights to express their displeasure, yet it is difficult to do when all we actuallty know is that Xpass is comming eventually. All info so far is just a speculation and we really know no details. Just because someone can get something extra, does not mean it will be taken from someone else. All will depend on design of the system we know nothing about yet. I worry as well, but I do not know yet if I will be happy or unhappy.
I btw, still wondering how things work in Universal with their system. Is it even possible to tour without paying extra for their pass.

 

[nytimez]

It may not have been the worst thing if they had sold/spun off the parks...

I agree with that.

 

[mesaboy2]

I btw, still wondering how things work in Universal with their system. Is it even possible to tour without paying extra for their pass.

Yes, especially if it's in the offseason. But even during peak times, you can get alot done in the first couple of hours of a park day and if you plan. Not very different from Disney in that regard.

By the way, I think this entire thread is deceptive since it's all honest speculation based on available info.

 

[KellyNY]

There are different ways to go about it. You can focus relentlessly on the next quarter like a dog chasing its tail or you can take the long view.

Iger does not take the long view. But, not many CEOs do anymore.

I think this system is actually a long view. They want to keep hotel prices up and so far the only way to do it was FD and endless discounts which people got used to so much that more and more was expected and this is not something they wanted to do.

Now, look at Xpass, I strongly believe that this will be available only for onsite. I do not think it will cost all that much, but reasonable price will make onsite guest to feel that paying all the extra for hotel is well justified and therefore prevent guest from even thinking about offsite. That is the whole idea, keeping onsite hotels full.

 

[Colleen27]

I btw, still wondering how things work in Universal with their system. Is it even possible to tour without paying extra for their pass.

Yes, but not well as I understand it. I have a relative who owns a home down there but still books a room at one of the Universal resorts if one of her kids/grandkids wants to do the US parks because she absolutely refuses to go without their express pass. She says it is just too frustrating, being in the standby queues while watching express guests just breeze through, sometimes the same guests multiple times while the standby guests inch along.

I'm not sure what sort of touring strategy she uses, though - she spends 3-4 months a year in the area and has a "If I don't get to it now I'll see it later" attitude about Disney attractions, and she doesn't strike me as the type to be there at rope drop with a good plan for hitting the popular rides early or anything like that. And since she's not a fan of US herself she's usually only there during school breaks when she has her kids & grandkids visiting, rather than at slower times when standby might be more pleasant.

 

[Colleen27]

Now, look at Xpass, I strongly believe that this will be available only for onsite. I do not think it will cost all that much, but reasonable price will make onsite guest to feel that paying all the extra for hotel is well justified and therefore prevent guest from even thinking about offsite. That is the whole idea, keeping onsite hotels full.

I'm not sure I believe that on either count. Limiting it to onsite guests would alienate locals/passholders, I think, although that will depend on how exactly it is implemented. If it requires super-advance ride reservations locals might not mind being excluded simply because they don't plan far enough in advance to get full value.

As far as the reasonable price, one of the rumor sites had a supposedly leaked document that priced it at $80pp. That isn't my idea of reasonable... An extra $400 for my family, on top of the $1400 we already pay for tickets?!?

 

[KellyNY]

I'm not sure I believe that on either count. Limiting it to onsite guests would alienate locals/passholders, I think, although that will depend on how exactly it is implemented. If it requires super-advance ride reservations locals might not mind being excluded simply because they don't plan far enough in advance to get full value.

As far as the reasonable price, one of the rumor sites had a supposedly leaked document that priced it at $80pp. That isn't my idea of reasonable... An extra $400 for my family, on top of the $1400 we already pay for tickets?!?

Unfortunately I do not think they care that much about locals. I do not think it will be made impossible to offsite to tour but it may be much less convenient, like in case with your friend and Universal.

Locals just as you said, keep in mind that they can always do this or that ride next time, so I am not sure how unhappy they will actually be. Everyone else is welcome to stay onsite and that is the point. They do not want you buy AP and then rent a condo offsite, eat offsite and spend nothing extra then your AP, while adding to lines. They may be more happy with you going once a year but leaving all the money you possibly can.

To be absolutely honest, $80pp, I hope we are talking per trip and not per day, is not that bad. For me it would mean, 1 less day vacation, 1 less TS meal and no water parks, but if I will get much better experience, it may be worth it.

I think the whole idea of all the changes they making right now, is to get as much profit as possible per person, even if it means loosing some offsite guests forever, new onsite guests will well compensate it with higher profit. I am not saying it is fair at all, I also planned to leave offsite, but it is what it is.

 

[nytimez]

I think this system is actually a long view. They want to keep hotel prices up and so far the only way to do it was FD and endless discounts which people got used to so much that more and more was expected and this is not something they wanted to do.

This is more dollar-chasing nonsense designed to squeeze extra cash out of their current customers, not creating great and groundbreaking attractions that would attract new guests and keep old guests coming back for more.

THAT would be the long view.

Ask people in a couple of years why they go to WDW, and I can guarantee that few people will answer "because of the great interactive queues" and "because I can plan my entire days out six months in advance."

If he wanted to take the long view, he'd announce major new expansions in multiple parks while labor is cheap and available and construction equipment across Florida sits idle.

He took a step in this direction with the Avatar announcement. But only a step -- and there's no guarantee the company really will follow through and sink half a billion dollars into a major AK expansion.

(And no, sorry, but FLE doesn't cut it as a "major new expansion" unless you're writing Disney press releases.)

 

[mesaboy2]

Locals just as you said, keep in mind that they can always do this or that ride next time, so I am not sure how unhappy they will actually be. Everyone else is welcome to stay onsite and that is the point. They do not want you buy AP and then rent a condo offsite, eat offsite and spend nothing extra then your AP, while adding to lines. They may be more happy with you going once a year but leaving all the money you possibly can.

I consider myself a local--even though I am a 2+ hour drive away--and I can tell you I would be unhappy if there is no consideration given to me as such or as an AP holder. I know others who feel the same way.

 

[KellyNY]

This is more dollar-chasing nonsense designed to squeeze extra cash out of their current customers, not creating great and groundbreaking attractions that would attract new guests and keep old guests coming back for more.

THAT would be the long view.

Ask people in a couple of years why they go to WDW, and I can guarantee that few people will answer "because of the great interactive queues" and "because I can plan my entire days out six months in advance."

If he wanted to take the long view, he'd announce major new expansions in multiple parks while labor is cheap and available and construction equipment across Florida sits idle.

He took a step in this direction with the Avatar announcement. But only a step -- and there's no guarantee the company really will follow through and sink half a billion dollars into a major AK expansion.

(And no, sorry, but FLE doesn't cut it as a "major new expansion" unless you're writing Disney press releases.)

I am not saying they hope to bring new visitors, they want to bring them onsite.

To be honest I do not know if new attractions can bring new visitors. It is all about set of mind, if you prefer cruise, you will not change your vacation destination just because there is a new ride in Disney. Do not let WWOHP mislead you here, because there was a set of fans of the book who would follow anything Potter even if would be just a stand with wands somewhere in a middle of a desert.

I oppose expansion of Disney as it is already too big and you cannot move too fast here. FLE and Avatar is good enough for now, give more and in few years you will have to top it again and again and at some point it will just collapse, most of us have only 1 week for vacation. As a matter of fact, Disney still a dream destination for many and as long as kids are born, they will not run out of business and for a newbie there is way too much to do for at least few trips.

 

[White_Sox_Fan]

True, but that's a key point left out by Jim. He doesn't mention decreased FPs being a reason why the increase is only estimated to be 1-8 minutes, only that xpass itself will only change the times 1-8 minutes.

If there are going to be fewer FPs, that brings up the question of whether that was accurately factored into the equation.

It just doesn't seem to add up.

Really, what I'm saying is that when Disney gets this deep into a project, there aren't going to be any numbers that come out indicating it was a mistake or won't be a net benefit. The numbers could turn out to be accurate, I just consider them highly suspect, if they are indeed even truly from Disney.

My assumption is that a larger percentage of capacity will be allocated to FP/xpass (in whatever form it takes). This will account for increased standby times, some of which I imagine, will be offset by the fact that some of those FP/xpass users will now not ride standby.

While we are all speculating I feel, from a business standpoint, that Disney would be smart to offer this to on-site guest only. For some this would be a better perk than EMH in that it does not involve the extremes of the park hours and guest could reserve more than just attraction entry, ie. Wishes and Illuminations viewing, Meet & Greets, etc.

While this may upset the locals, I know that if I were one I would limit my visits to those days when the crowds are so low that fastpass is useless anyway. JMO however.

 

[mom2rtk]

I am not saying they hope to bring new visitors, they want to bring them onsite.

To be honest I do not know if new attractions can bring new visitors. It is all about set of mind, if you prefer cruise, you will not change your vacation destination just because there is a new ride in Disney. Do not let WWOHP mislead you here, because there was a set of fans of the book who would follow anything Potter even if would be just a stand with wands somewhere in a middle of a desert.

I oppose expansion of Disney as it is already too big and you cannot move too fast here. FLE and Avatar is good enough for now, give more and in few years you will have to top it again and again and at some point it will just collapse, most of us have only 1 week for vacation. As a matter of fact, Disney still a dream destination for many and as long as kids are born, they will not run out of business and for a newbie there is way too much to do for at least few trips.

I don't care that much about expansion. But if they're going to continue to pack more folks into the parks, as I'm sure the marketing folks are charged with doing, they're going to have to do something. Even if it comes in the form of Avatarland.

You can only do so much with interactive queues you know.

 

[KellyNY]

I consider myself a local--even though I am a 2+ hour drive away--and I can tell you I would be unhappy if there is no consideration given to me as such or as an AP holder. I know others who feel the same way.

Yes, some people will not be happy but considering you love Disney that much to actually invest in AP and it is not cheap even for FL resident, would less convenient trip enough to turn you back or maybe you will just find other strategies, go during less crowded times and adjust according to situation?
I cannot speak for others but I would just adjust just like I adjusted my trips to keep price the same when prices jumped.

See, if they loose you or some others as a result, they will still win. Visitors who would switch onsite from offsite will compensate profit. Now since there will be less people, they will need less people to maintain parks, less things get broken, in other words they also safe on operational expenses. It is not fair but it is win/win for them and setting our fellings aside here, as a businessman Iger is brilliant.

 

[White_Sox_Fan]

I am not saying they hope to bring new visitors, they want to bring them onsite.

I agree, anything they can do to get you onsite means more $$ for them. They offer ME so you don't need a car, they practically give away extra days on MYW tickets. Anytime you leave the property your wallet goes with you, they don't need more guest, they just need guest that spend more money onsite.

Disney's treatment of the locals is another matter, they offer discounted tickets with restrictions because they don't need a bunch of local people there in the middle of the summer or spring break, they need them there on a Monday in January when visitation is low.

 

[doconeill]

I btw, still wondering how things work in Universal with their system. Is it even possible to tour without paying extra for their pass.

In April 2009, during what was a Mass school vacation week (but the week after Easter week), I took DD#1 to US, and were able to pretty much do everything, several things twice (Simpsons, MiB, Mummy, and leave around 4:30pm. And that was without a plan, and taking in the Beetlejuice show and the magic demonstration where they try and sell you those magic kits. Our longest wait was for Disaster at about 35-40 minutes, but that was because we though the show was supposed to be earlier - and about 202-5 minutes for the second Simpsons ride later in the day. No Express Pass needed.

December 2010 we did IOA. No specific plan except Harry Potter first, but we did pretty much everything we wanted to at IOA, circling back again to HP where by about 3pm it had gotten very crowded, but we didn't really wait in line for anything. We didn't ride anything at HP in the afternoon as it really was crowded.

Neither time was with an Express Plus pass, and I only saw minimal use of it.

As for catering to locals vs. on-site, WDW has always had a different makeup of guests in that regard than did DLR. They may be seeing decreasing $$ from the local population, so they aren't as concerned (all pure conjecture, really...I don't know the numbers - and we don't know if any of this really will affect locals)

 

[mesaboy2]

Yes, some people will not be happy but considering you love Disney that much to actually invest in AP and it is not cheap even for FL resident, would less convenient trip enough to turn you back or maybe you will just find other strategies, go during less crowded times and adjust according to situation?
I cannot speak for others but I would just adjust just like I adjusted my trips to keep price the same when prices jumped.

See, if they loose you or some others as a result, they will still win. Visitors who would switch onsite from offsite will compensate profit. Now since there will be less people, they will need less people to maintain parks, less things get broken, in other words they also safe on operational expenses. It is not fair but it is win/win for them and setting our fellings aside here, as a businessman Iger is brilliant.

We'll just all have to sit back and see what it looks like when we see the whole picture, whenever that is. I'm hoping for a system that rewards planners rather than spenders, but I'm probably just being naive.