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

[glamdring269]

JMHO but if you're going to have EP, I'd consider doing Uni second -- it's going to be hard to go back to SB lines after having the EP. We also find it just isn't so great to do DHS after US -- the two parks are so much alike, yet DHS pales in comparison.

Honestly the way we've done WDW in the past we never really dealt with SB either. Maybe once per day if we really wanted to ride something again that we didn't properly plan for. We usually hit RD and used FP wisely though. I imagine in the 'new' WDW we will likely RD, maybe even AM EMH, and have our FP for afternoon/evening parks.

 

[Queen2PrincessG]

I can't for the life of me imagine why this would be the case.

And since I'm assuming this thread is still about the report cited in the OP, if all those people waiting in longer SB lines aren't so happy about that experience why would they want to spend more than when SB lines were shorter?

BECAUSE if you stay on site you are allowed to make your FP earlier. That is a PLUS for many people vs waiting day of.

 

[coopersmom]

What was projected ROI for FP+?

What's the ROI benchmark that moves this beyond "boondoggle?"

What does Disney project, after full rollout and hard numbers (you choose the time frame), FP+ will look like? Do they see same-day FP pulls after you use up pre-books? Do they see an opportunity for FP pulls that will support another revenue channel (ParkHopper)?

I don't have internal documents (and neither do you) but Disney always has "things on the table" that various project managers are proposing: new rides and shows, new hotels, park expansions, whole new parks. To beat out any of those proposals MyMagic/FastPass would have had to look better, financially, on paper. When you're looking at spending a billion dollars, the bottom line is the ultimate decider. And, on that level, it is unquestionably a big, fat failure.

We are now at approximately three-plus years in active development, which is roughly equal to the (construction) time spent overhauling California Adventure in Disneyland and double the time it took Universal to bring Harry Potter Part 1 online. Compared to those projects, calling MyMagic plus a boondoggle is being kind.

Carsland, at just over a billion itself, reportedly resulted in 30% attendance jumps AND record hotel occupancy (with NO discounts) for Disneyland in year one of operation. Every hotel in Anaheim reported increased occupancy rates. Major win. Those numbers have slowed, but not stopped, in year two, with Disneyland currently seeing something like a 6-8% increase so far for year two.

Universal did even better, though they admittedly started further back than any Disney park, with 30%+ attendance jumps for two-plus years, with attendance continuing to grow at 8-10% year after that (which is, frankly, phenomenal), even without Harry Potter Part 2 online yet. Occupancy rates at Universal hotels were listed as being up as much as 40% at one point. Again, numbers that are basically unprecedented for projects that cost them far less than either of the Disney examples.

So far, Disney World has a 1.5% attendance gain over it's pre-FastPass+/MyMagic incarnation, and that includes the opening of "New Fantasyland," which also resulted in a similar >5% year-over-year bump.

Now there's no way Disney doesn't try to spin this as a success story, regardless of actual numbers, but there's also zero chance this is even coming CLOSE to meeting profitability expectations.

There's been a lot of talk about per-guest spending, and that's definitely an area any market is always looking to increase, but the real, big money comes from MORE customers. There's only so much, realistically, you can expect to increase an existing customer to. (see: blood from stone) You've gotta' grow your overall numbers to see siginficant profit upticks. That's why they call it "growth" ... And why every corporation in America, including Disney, is hugely focused on "new customer acquisition" as its primary goal.

I don't see FastPass+ driving a single new customer through Disney's doors ... Or Mickey head park gates, as the case may be. Thus, it's not doing what it was supposed to.

 

[Davey Jones II]

Not just "not all guests tour this way"... but seriously MOST guest do not tour this way. Think about it... If you used to pull 3 FP to TT in one day... How many people do you feel did that? 2000? If even that? If 2000 people pull 3 each, that is 6000 FP. TT only gives out a total of 9000 in a day! So if 2000 ppl pull 3, 1000 pull 2, and 1000 pull 1, that is all 9000 FPs taken by approximately 4000 people. That means the other 34,000 people visiting Epcot that day did not use FP for TT at all! It was extremely disproportionately unused.



It's not creating a sense of urgency. That is only the perception out here among the tiny subset of society that is disboards. The other rest of the world is using the app just fine. Simple fact is most people did want to ride Soarin or Test Track. They just never used FP-. Now, from the comfort of their home they are playing with their Mickey App as easily as they would play Candy Crush or Angry Birds and they're queuing up rides. It is so awesome in just how easy Disney made it to pick rides that everyone is doing it not out of obligation or having to schedule, but simply because it is really cool.

Because FP+ is so good, and so easy to use by everyone makes it so much less useful to you (and me) as individuals who used to essentially monopolize FP-.

It's not because Disney has ruined it -- it's that they've removed the inconvenience, difficulty, and general disinterest in using it that existed before, and now it's used by everyone.

Your arguments are based on a lot of false premises. I'm afraid you're living up to your screen name.

False premise #1: Hardly anyone used Legacy Fast Pass.

Actually, it's been established that 50% of guests used it, even if they didn't all "optimize" it. I'm sorry, but half of all guests is a lot more than "hardly anyone."
In post number 868 you wrote: "I'm sorry you don't like that Disney made a system that everyone wants to use (whereas hardly anyone wanted to use FP-)..."
That is categorically untrue. But don't let the facts get in the way of your argument.

False premise #2: Most guests are using FP+ because it's just so gee whiz cool.

Actually, people are using it because Disney marketed it heavily. And as for the App, lots of people have complained about it's bugginess, especially with the spotty wifi in the parks. If Disboard users are having problems with it, I suppose you're going to argue that no one else is? So others are much more technologically adept than Disboard posters? Why is that, exactly?

False premise #3: Everyone (except us cranks on Disboards) just loves the new system.

Really, is that why Disney is still dealing with a backlash (no, not just on these boards) and promising changes to the system? Do they make a habit of promising changes to something that is loved and embraced by most of their guests?

False premise #4: Those who weren't using Legacy Fast Pass are much better off now.

Disney socialized the system by throwing everyone a very small bone. We get one useful fast pass for a headliner (useful only if you happened to pick a day and time when the standby is too long) and two essentially useless ones (for rides like Imagination and Maelstrom!).

Meanwhile, non-headliners have acquired long waits when they rarely had one before, and the damn Mickey scanners take much longer than having a CM look at your paper FP, so we have slower moving FP and SB lines.

Who's better off, compared to the old system? I would argue just about no one.

False premise #5: What we say on Disboards doesn't count because we represent a small minority of visitors.

First of all, I'm not sure that's even true. But even if it is, let's not forget the 80-20 rule. We at least represent Disney's core customer base of loyal, repeat visitors. And that base represents a disproportionate number of total guest visits, and a disproportionate percentage of revenue for Disney. We are not "one and done" once in a lifetime visitors, or people who might or might not come back ten years from now.

 

[OtherScott]

I don't have internal documents (and neither do you) but Disney always has "things on the table" that various project managers are proposing: new rides and shows, new hotels, park expansions, whole new parks. To beat out any of those proposals MyMagic/FastPass would have had to look better, financially, on paper. When you're looking at spending a billion dollars, the bottom line is the ultimate decider. And, on that level, it is unquestionably a big, fat failure.

Oh, I see. You don't know what it was supposed to do, nor when. But you're here today to inform that, despite the fact that it has not even fully implemented, it's a unquestionably a big, fat failure.

Thanks.

BTW, how did Cars do while they were building it?

 

[redrosesix]

I see. We used the bands in testing last Oct, and again last month when it was rolled out. Definitely different to have additional limitations, but we weren't soured on FP+ by our Feb experience. Would still like same-day FP+ after the pre-scheduled ones are used, and hopping ability. Fingers crossed...




That IS a random sample of the customers experiencing the product (you don't need people not in the parks at that time for it to be a statistically random sample -- the kind that matters when drawing any conclusions -- they sample ALL THE TIME), with the exception of excluding non-Americans.

Do you mean those traveling to WDW from a foreign country that trip? I'd be surprised if this was the case for ALL surveying... wish we had more details on these practices and the reasoning here... just out of curiosity...

same -- and only once have we been eligible for any of their surveys.

And I think they would actually get more intelligent responses about FP+ AFTER people had been in the parks.

 

[Angel Ariel]

First off, I really am pleased that it works for you (no sarcasm in here, I'm being sincere).

Most people who go on vacation have a vacation budget. So say they have one day for each park and have $200 to spend. Long waits on day one might drive them to the gift shop if they are doing what you believe they are and that may well be the case. But if they aimed to spend $50 a day and spent $100 on day one, they will only spend less over the next three days. I don't personally know anyone who spends out of their 'daily bread' money on vacation. As far as I have seen, most people, regardless of their destination, have a separate vacation account for savings and when it's gone, it's gone. I would love to contact my payroll office on Disney's free in-park wifi and ask them to give me a little more money so that I can pass the time in a gift shop instead of in line but the bottom line is, most people save very carefully for their vacation and don't have an enormous margin for error with spends.

Exactly. My budget is my budget, and that is determined long before setting foot on property. The # of FPs I get/day has no bearing on how much I spend.

 

[Davey Jones II]

Is FP+ available for that one? Is that Tier 1 or 2? Should I give it A, B or C priority? Hurry up!! I'm busy planning for Oct!!

Definitely Tier 1, the best, the greatest. After all, Disney believes that the parks are becoming all about smartphones

 

[coopersmom]

And back to the original thread topic: increased standby wait times.

There is NO way for Disney to spin increased wait times ANYWHERE as a win, if they can't say it's due to double digit park attendance increases.

Average wait times mean diddly squat. Not just to "superusers" but to ANY consumer. Let's say you're one of the supposedly clueless masses that never used or understood legacy FastPass. You come to Magic Kingdom in July 2012 and you see 120+ minute waits for Space Mountain, Slash Mountain and Big Thunder Mountain. Well, that's frustrating because you don't want to wait two hours but, hey, look over there, it's Pirates or Haunted Mansion--'Hey, I've heard of these and 10-15 minute wait? That sounds awesome.'

Even arriving late with zero planning you could conceivably walk around Disney World on a July afternoon and go on way more than three rides with less than 30 minutes wait for each (usually people's tolerance limit: 25 sounds so much better than 35). Maybe they weren't the really big ones, but after you waited in several really short lines (>10 minutes) maybe you decided that waiting in one really long line was worth it after all.

Now you're that same person seeing the same two hour waits at headliners, but when you walk away from those you also see 30-minute plus waits on the "little" rides, too. Double bummer. And you're staying offsite so you even waited in ANOTHER 30-minute to get your FastPass+ selections and they're all for secondary rides, too. Won't it feel great to jump into the "FastPass" line for Disney Philharmagic and wait the exact same amount of time as those without your "special entry band?" (Or any ride that has a standby line shorter than the one you stood in to GET the FastPasses in the first place?)

Which sounds like a better guest experience?

And throw out experience altogether, it's simply bad press for Disney to report ANY increase in lines without the requisite increase in attendance to balance it out. It's one thing to say, 'The lines are longer because our attendance is up 10%. Yay!' It's another to say, 'Sure some lines are longer but our new special app means a few lines may be shorter for you, but only if there's availability, and the app works and you booked ahead of time and we can't guarantee which rides those are, or that there's room for your whole party or ...'

 

[coopersmom]

Oh, I see. You don't know what it was supposed to do, nor when. But you're here today to inform that, despite the fact that it has not even fully implemented, it's a unquestionably a big, fat failure.

Thanks.

BTW, how did Cars do while they were building it?

I'm saying it hasn't boosted attendance like those additions did IMMEDIATELY. So, in that dollars-to-dollars comparison, yeah, it's a failure, because it was most certainly done INSTEAD OF another project, including capital improvements, that was also considered for this billion dollar outlay.

I believe Disney has admitted that California Adventure attendance was down something like 5% (after never meeting expectations) during construction, so subtract that from the 30% year-one gain and you've still got 25% growth.

Please tell me how you expect FastPass+/MyMagic to ever match even a single year of 25% growth? (And remember growth is exponential, meaning 25% one year + 5% the next means year 3 was 30% higher than year 1.) 1% attendance increase is within the margin of error as flat. Flat, in stockholder parlance, is bad.

Disney is a publicly owned and traded company. Focus is one year-over-year numbers. There may be long term projections that show this adding 1% here and 5% there over the long haul, but there's no one approving projects for a gain only after 20 years (your tree analogy) in a PUBLIC company. Because if they did, they'd be fired. The market wants now-now-now and the market drives your stock price, which is your company valuation. And the company valuation dictates the pay of its executives at the highest level. They all feed off each other.

The numbers on this project HAD to show immediate profitability or it would never have been approved. Period. I don't need to be on the board to know this. It's common business sense. This isn't a $1,500 restroom renovation, it's a billion dollar project. When they signed off on it it was because they though it would make them bank right out of the gate. It's not really doing that in any significant sense. 1-5% is NOT what you want from a billion dollar investment, even if you can conclusively tie it to this specific project, which I don't think anyone REALLY can.

 

[Angel Ariel]

BECAUSE if you stay on site you are allowed to make your FP earlier. That is a PLUS for many people vs waiting day of.

Offsite will have prebooking at some point - it is already testing. It may not be as long of a window as onsite when everything is said and done, but offsite aren't going to remain restricted to day of either.

 

[OtherScott]

I'm saying it hasn't boosted attendance like those additions did IMMEDIATELY. So, in that dollars-to-dollars comparison, yeah, it's a failure, because it was most certainly done INSTEAD OF another project, including capital improvements, that was also considered for this billion dollar outlay.

I believe Disney has admitted that California Adventure attendance was down something like 5% (after never meeting expectations) during construction, so subtract that from the 30% year-one gain and you've still got 25% growth.

Please tell me how you expect FastPass+/MyMagic to ever match even a single year of 25% growth. (And remember growth is exponential, meaning 25% one year + 5% the next means year 3 was 30% higher than year 1.) 1% attendance increase is within the margin of error as flat. Flat, in stockholder parlance, is bad.

So you'd like to compare the staggered rollout of an technological support system, spread across 4 theme parks, which began 6 months ago, is still in development, and whose final form is not yet known

with

a 12 acre physical attraction at a single site, that opened date-specific and has been open for over a year

Why?

 

[OtherScott]

The numbers on this project HAD to show immediate profitability or it would never have been approved. Period.

 

[coopersmom]

So you'd like to compare the staggered rollout of an technological support system, spread across 4 theme parks, which began 6 months ago, is still in development, and whose final form is not yet known

with

a 12 acre physical attraction at a single site, that opened date-specific and has been open for over a year

Why?

Exactly why I said in the quote above ... Because it's what DisneyWorld could have got for the same amount of money they spent on FastPass+/MyMagic: a guaranteed attendance bump and unambiguously happy customers. The guest experience surveys, social media and even real media buzz out of California Adventure were off the charts positive. No hand wringing or equivocating required.

More guests = more money = better investment.

 

[Angel Ariel]

As my girl Ursala says, "life is full of tough choices..." If you want to ride it twice you will have to wait in standby. no one is saying you can't

And again I ask - who am I taking a FP away from when I get a second FP for something like Buzz, if there were still FPs left at the end of the day (which there frequently were)?

 

[OtherScott]

Exactly why I said in the quote above ... Because it's what DisneyWorld could have got for the same amount of money they spent on FastPass+/MyMagic: a guaranteed attendance bump and unambiguously happy customers. The guest experience surveys, social media and even real media buzz out of California Adventure were off the charts positive. No hand wringing or equivocating required.

More guests = more money = better investment.

MM+ and FP+ are designed to support operations (current and future) across 4 parks.

While I don't doubt that a Cars Land (or probable expansion of Star Wars) would draw more customers, the 23% increase at DCA only gets them to within 2.2 million of Orlando's worst performing parks (DHS and AK).

If Disney does what you'd like them to do, to me it makes all the more sense to get infrastructure in place to manage increased customers. If DCAs numbers translate to Florida, you're talking over 2 million more people.

 

[flicx]

Bottom line is that every one is complaining because now they may have to wait. TOO BAD!

Why shouldn't people complain if you have to wait longer due to this new system. After all we pay to get in and if we experience less the cost per ride/ experience goes up. Not to mention after rolling out this new system Disney increased ticket prices again! If you are getting less for your money I would call that a valid issue!

 

[MaryKatesMom]

And back to the original thread topic: increased standby wait times.

There is NO way for Disney to spin increased wait times ANYWHERE as a win, if they can't say it's due to double digit park attendance increases.

Average wait times mean diddly squat. Not just to "superusers" but to ANY consumer. Let's say you're one of the supposedly clueless masses that never used or understood legacy FastPass. You come to Magic Kingdom in July 2012 and you see 120+ minute waits for Space Mountain, Slash Mountain and Big Thunder Mountain. Well, that's frustrating because you don't want to wait two hours but, hey, look over there, it's Pirates or Haunted Mansion--'Hey, I've heard of these and 10-15 minute wait? That sounds awesome.'

Even arriving late with zero planning you could conceivably walk around Disney World on a July afternoon and go on way more than three rides with less than 30 minutes wait for each (usually people's tolerance limit: 25 sounds so much better than 35). Maybe they weren't the really big ones, but after you waited in several really short lines (>10 minutes) maybe you decided that waiting in one really long line was worth it after all.

Now you're that same person seeing the same two hour waits at headliners, but when you walk away from those you also see 30-minute plus waits on the "little" rides, too. Double bummer. And you're staying offsite so you even waited in ANOTHER 30-minute to get your FastPass+ selections and they're all for secondary rides, too. Won't it feel great to jump into the "FastPass" line for Disney Philharmagic and wait the exact same amount of time as those without your "special entry band?" (Or any ride that has a standby line shorter than the one you stood in to GET the FastPasses in the first place?)

Which sounds like a better guest experience?

And throw out experience altogether, it's simply bad press for Disney to report ANY increase in lines without the requisite increase in attendance to balance it out. It's one thing to say, 'The lines are longer because our attendance is up 10%. Yay!' It's another to say, 'Sure some lines are longer but our new special app means a few lines may be shorter for you, but only if there's availability, and the app works and you booked ahead of time and we can't guarantee which rides those are, or that there's room for your whole party or ...'

I agree.

I have most of my FP+ sort of stacked in a 3 hour block. The longer SB lines mean I really can't ride anything BUT those three rides in 3 hours and I get to criss cross the park. Sure I can do Space Mountain at 3PM but if I'm scheduled at Splash at 4 and POTC at 5. That will be it.

However if I space them out I'm not much better off. Say, it is now 1,3 and 5. Do I trust the wait times? How can I really judge how long it takes to get through a ride? Now I am still doing only 3 rides but over 5 hours instead of 3.

 

[JimmyV]

MM+ and FP+ are designed to support operations (current and future) across 4 parks.

What does that sentence even mean as it pertains to FP+? What is FP+ supposed to be "supporting"? That just sounds like corporate techno speak for: "FP+ doesn't really do anything to enhance the guest's experience or to drive profit. It's benefits are more nuanced and hidden than that." OK. So what "operations" is it supposed to support? MM+? I get that. But FP+ is a stand-alone system that happens to interface with MM+. But in and of itself it does not "support operations." I think that explanation mimimizes its function and glosses over its shortcomings.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

same -- and only once have we been eligible for any of their surveys. And I think they would actually get more intelligent responses about FP+ AFTER people had been in the parks.

Ok -- your example alone shows they haven't excluded travelers from abroad altogether -- which wouldn't have made any sense. Still wish I could know more...

When they get you entering the park, they still capture things like when you arrived in WDW, how long your stay is, what parks you've been to and are planning to visit, whether you've used FP+ yet, etc, etc. Pretty sure that when they nab you for the survey doesn't really matter in terms of data collection and conclusions that can be drawn.