Spirited News and Observations and Opinions ...

[lobelia]

Yeah, but the data is too big for it. Pivot is how you represent and manipulate the data. In my experience building a BI tool.. what you learn is constraints exist around what you can do in real-time because of either 1) data scale and/or 2) computational complexity. So you do all that stuff in batches and store precomputed values so you aren't working with the raw data anymore, but rather facts and dimensions (in a CUBE world..) and then you use nice pivot tools to interpret it.

Multidimensional databases is where this analytics stuff lives... spreadsheets and other tools are nice ways to visualize and query the meaty data that really lives off in the massive db servers.

I am not a fan of FP+, but I would love to be the one to work with the data and try to make informed suggestions on improving experiences and efficiencies. Is it a sign of maturity when talking about pivot tables and EXCEL's statistical add-ins makes you excited? danlb_2000, I am definently going to do some investigation into Power Pivot. Thanks for the suggestion.

Even though they will be collecting tons of data, it will be the research agenda set forth by Disney that will determine which data and trends get noticed and used. As someone who wants to make WDW a better guest experience, I would bet it would be pretty demoralizing to be put in a position to find ways to nickel and dime guests. I still maintain that data from the bracelets, my spending habits, and the FP+ I register for alone does not indicate a guest experience. To get to the truth about guests' experiences surveys, focus groups, and in-person interviews need to happen.

 

[HMF]

Now now dear Spirit, Iger stated in the interview last week that he admires Walt and loves to watch (or listen?) to a 20 hr interview Walt gave. He is clearly the true successor to Walt and is infallible.

Iger makes Eisner look like Walt's handpicked succesor.

 

[flynnibus]

I am not a fan of FP+, but I would love to be the one to work with the data and try to make informed suggestions on improving experiences and efficiencies. Is it a sign of maturity when talking about pivot tables and EXCEL's statistical add-ins makes you excited? danlb_2000, I am definently going to do some investigation into Power Pivot. Thanks for the suggestion.

It's EXTREMELY powerful and useful to be able to look at your data in this type of way. But you also need to know how to ask the right type of questions. and that's where the smart people come in. It's very much an industry of 'raw complex power that needs to be harnessed for good'. But I can also understand some that say 'does that justify the spend? they have to monetize elsewhere..' - Maybe.. its hard to say what their philosophy really is. Some companies invest to push success.. some insist on direct return on investment.

It's an interesting space - but a difficult one because everything is so customized and there are a lot of non-believers. It's funny how people will beg for 'reports' that just list thousands of data points.. and can understand that. But when you say 'why are you looking at the report in the first place? what are you trying to do?' - some don't get it. The point of looking at the report is to actually answer a question.. BI is about integrating data and correlations to answer questions that before were very difficult to answer.

 

[HMF]

Sort of off topic but this thread goes all directions... I posted this in another thread but does anyone think if/when DHS gets overhauled and the hat gets removed, they should add a statue of Walt, Ub Iwerks, Mickey and Oswald?

They would probably just build a duplicate of the statue in DCA.

 

[PhotoDave219]

No need to be sorry, I found it a refreshing change from the general tone and repetitiveness of this thread. How many times can anyone make the same argument for 217 pages. Now butter, that's a topic that can be spread thick and never loses it's flavor.

Well, it can be tied in easily.... cutting butter from a bakery is indicative and just a further example of Disney's continued cost-cutting. Its an insane example but its totally insane that the mouse would do something like that.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

I agree, this is pretty amazing, powerful and scary stuff, but something that is clearly needed in this day and time.
I have trouble seeing how it could be applied for use at Disney though. The strong point of it seems to be finding and linking data across multiple systems for the purpose of finding abnormalities or fraudulent activities. And, while Disney could probably use something like this to catch bad guys on property, I'm not sure it's what they're aiming for with NextGen.

Everything I've read about NextGen points to finding new ways to improve the guest experience in hopes of influencing them to spend more money, with the thought being a happy guest will spend more money, and choose to come back sooner. Yes, they will achieve this via data mining and the more detailed feedback they will be able to get from MagicBand, but it's more about streamlining the experience. Mind you, there may be more involved that they're not spelling out, but the following is just some of what I've found.

The following is from patent: - 7720718 - Management of the flow of persons in relation to centers of crowd concentration
-A goal of this invention is to improve the desired functionality needed to derive increased guest satisfaction, additional revenue opportunities and resort differentiation.

The following from another patent (application) - 20120271834 - Managing experience state to personalize destination visits
-For example, the operator may change arbitration rules based on data mining that may indicate that entitlements have not been distributed as desired (e.g., experiences were being provided in a too concentrated manner to a small fraction of visitors, experiences were not being delivered to preferred customers as often as desired, and due to other business rules/goals). In other cases, the I/O devices may be used to alert operators of the management system when a visitor is about to leave a facility without receiving one or more experiences (which they may have purchased the entitlement to), and the operator may the take proactive steps to try to provide the visitor with the experience or to take later steps to make up for the missed opportunity (send the visitor a free pass or gift).

And one more from a more recent patent application - 20130018661 - Guest experience management system and method
-One disadvantage at many theme parks and amusement parks is the long lines that guests face to enter the park, at the attractions within the park, and when purchasing food at mealtimes. Long wait times for attractions in particular detract from the guests experience, not just from the time spent standing in lines, but also by causing the guest to rush from attraction to attraction to maximize the number of popular attractions, without taking time to notice or enjoy the other offerings of the theme park such as music, live entertainment, restaurants, shops, etc.
-Additionally, guests that rarely frequent the park are typically unfamiliar with the layout of the park as well as with the peak times for more popular rides. This can further decrease those guests enjoyment, as they may take circuitous routes in order to try and visit as many attractions as possible, and may cause them to experience even longer lines by failing to visit the most popular attractions at off-peak hours.
-Different methods have been used to try and minimize wait times in theme parks and amusement parks, including limiting ticket sales on a given day to prevent overcrowding and allowing guests to purchase more expensive express tickets that allow the guest to use shorter express lines for popular attractions. These methods are limited and more prevent overcrowding in the theme park itself, but do not guarantee guests that they will have shorter wait times.
-Similarly, other methods to try and minimize wait times in theme parks include allowing guests to appear at the attraction and reserve a specific time in the future when the guest can return to the attraction and enter through an express line. This method is also limited in that it does not allow guests planning their trips to know ahead of time what attractions they will be able to visit on a given day, and what is the best route through the theme park for those desired attractions. Moreover, such systems will typically not allow the guest to make multiple appointments (manifested as flexible return windows)s at the same time. Thus, if the only available appointment times for a popular attraction are late in the day, the guest must either make the appointment and forego the opportunity to make appointments at other attractions, or risk missing the popular attraction entirely.
-Accordingly, there is a need for a method and system that better manages the guest experience and the wait times at theme parts, amusement parks and resorts.

I should add that this last one includes a whole lot more detail about providing customized experiences, not just more FP+s, but interactive elements and special effects made available for specific guests based on what "experience level" they purchased. (This could point to a new ticket pricing structure.)

I could cite more examples, but I think this should suffice (for now).

TLDR: Believe what you want, but there are several patents filed by Disney which clearly lay out the specifics of how Disney would like to use their new NextGen MagicBand Data mining tools, none of which references selling it or sharing it with third parties.

I don't think it has anything to do with improving the guest experience. Just getting people to spend more money. Whether through being easier (wave of the wrist) or coercion (more FastPass+s based on how much you spend on merchandise or type of resorts).

 

[tomman710]

To anyone defending MyMagic or at least greeting it with an apathetic hug, I have this legit question(s):

Is this something you really wanted in the parks, if Iger came to you and said, hey we can spend close to $2 billion on NextGen or we could spend the same amount on plussing existing attractions and adding new ones ... what would you have chosen?

Yes I know we can't undo what is done but my point is I just don't see how this is a debate still. We spend alot of time and posts trying to convince each other of one thing or another but in the end I would bet 99% of us would agree this would not enhance our visit over the same money invested elsewhere. (I am allowing 1% for the paid advocates that will say, "Yes I would have picked this over attractions! This is better than an old steak at Le Cellier and two fastpasses to Little Mermaid!")

Even if you aren't concerned about the privacy issues, the micromanaging issues, the differentiated class system issues, the issues of elongated lines, the issues about the increased economics of visiting a park, etc etc ... even if none of those things about NextGen bother you ... at the very least I can't imagine anyone thinking this is a huge plus to their visit over the money spent on virtually anything else for the parks specifically ... am I wrong?

 

[flynnibus]

To anyone defending MyMagic or at least greeting it with an apathetic hug, I have this legit question(s):

Is this something you really wanted in the parks, if Iger came to you and said, hey we can spend close to $2 billion on NextGen or we could spend the same amount on plussing existing attractions and adding new ones ... what would you have chosen?

This is the quintessential example of a contrived question that doesn't represent reality at all or actually prove anything.

Why not just say 'What if Iger came up to you and said, hey we can spend one billion on NextGen, or I can give that money to you, which would you have chosen?'

The alternatives are not equally plausible, making it completely unrealistic.

 

[GrumpyFan]

Is it (NextGen) what or how I would have liked for them to spend money on, no, certainly not. But, I see it as the reality of managing a resort that has become too big and too difficult for them to manage effectively. Sure, they could add more attractions/lands, and this yields some bump in attendance, but not enough in revenue for them to recognize a justifiable return for Wall Street. Also, when they add more, it just tilts the balance of operations and adds more burden to maintenance where they have to prioritize what gets attention, since their budget doesn't increase or change enough with the new additions.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

This is the quintessential example of a contrived question that doesn't represent reality at all or actually prove anything.

Why not just say 'What if Iger came up to you and said, hey we can spend one billion on NextGen, or I can give that money to you, which would you have chosen?'

The alternatives are not equally plausible, making it completely unrealistic.

Why not? They couldn't have spent $1.5 Billion on plussing the parks?

 

[GrumpyFan]

Why not? They couldn't have spent $1.5 Billion on plussing the parks?

Sure they could have, and some of it actually is going toward plussing the parks, just not in the way we (the fans) would actually prefer. They're adding small incremental changes and enhancements via interactive elements throughout.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Is it (NextGen) what or how I would have liked for them to spend money on, no, certainly not. But, I see it as the reality of managing a resort that has become to big and too difficult for them to manage effectively. Sure, they could add more attractions/lands, and this yields some bump in attendance, but not enough in revenue for them to recognize a justifiable return for Wall Street. Also, when they add more, it just tilts the balance of operations and adds more burden to maintenance where they have to prioritize what gets attention, since their budget doesn't increase or change enough with the new additions.

How do you know that they wouldn't get justifiable ROI? What is this based on? Carsland and TWWOHP seem to disagree.

 

[flynnibus]

Why not? They couldn't have spent $1.5 Billion on plussing the parks?

Anything is possible - But lets play along and say 'Would you prefer we just sell Disneyland Paris, and use the money to fix WDW?'

'Would you prefer I (Iger) give up all my salary and compensation in lieu of funding WDW repairs?'

'Would you prefer if instead of doing DCA v2, that we just fixed WDW?'

The last one is a great example.. they could have gone either way... but what's the point of polling a question like that? Showing preferences? Then there is no point of putting the pretense in there of 'if Iger asked you...' - like Iger gives a @$%$ what you think. Cut to the chase.. ask what you prefer.. that's all that matters and is actually relevant to the poster.

 

[GrumpyFan]

How do you know that they wouldn't get justifiable ROI? What is this based on? Carsland and TWWOHP seem to disagree.

Large additions like those, will certainly have a ROI over time (3 years?), but, the cost of such additions (at least the way Disney does them), is becoming more and more difficult to sell to the executives and investors who don't have the long term patience and want to see immediate returns on their money or at the least, within a year.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Sure they could have, and some of it actually is going toward plussing the parks, just not in the way we (the fans) would actually prefer. They're adding small incremental changes and enhancements via interactive elements throughout.

Still going in the wrong direction from what people actually go to theme parks for.

And sure they just spent $425 million on the New Fantasyland, I can almost guarantee they will NOT see a positive ROI from it. And they will use that to say, "See! Building new rides doesn't produce a positive ROI." Well maybe if they didn't build it 1.) Aimed at such an incredibly narrow demographic. AND 2.) have the merchandising department control theme park development. Yeah, they sell a lot of Princess crap. That doesn't mean we want an E-Ticketless Princessland.

I honestly think that Disney needs to pull their head out of the bank vault long enough to actually figure out what a theme park even is.

 

[GrumpyFan]

Still going in the wrong direction from what people actually go to theme parks for.

I don't disagree. I would love to see more investment in the parks and attractions, but it just doesn't seem like that's how or where they want to invest right now. Or, for whatever reason, it just seems like they think WDW is "good enough, why bother adding more when we continue to raise prices and add attendance with little new investment". Of course, the downfall of this mentality is that they run the risk of topping out, falling behind, losing attendance (and money) and not realizing the problem until they're 5 years or so down the road and have a lot of catching up to do. Let's see now, where have we seen THAT before? You all should remember the Pressler era at DLR.

 

[tomman710]

This is the quintessential example of a contrived question that doesn't represent reality at all or actually prove anything.

Why not just say 'What if Iger came up to you and said, hey we can spend one billion on NextGen, or I can give that money to you, which would you have chosen?'

The alternatives are not equally plausible, making it completely unrealistic.

I respectfully disagree and in actuality think this is an immaterial response to an honest question that is entirely grounded in reality considering that the mantra of NextGen is "ENHANCE THE GUEST EXPERIENCE" ... so my question was, specifically to those supporting it ... WOULD THIS ENHANCE YOUR EXPERIENCE?

It seems to me we are all arguing about the merits/ethics/morals of one aspect or another when in reality the one fundamental question (the answer I feel would unite us all) is ... would this enhance our experience?

WDW is a theme park, so to ask does this enhance your experience over investing in to the parks (which is WDW's fundamental business, correct me if I am wrong about that, are they a theme park business?) is a relevant question and to call it "completely unrealistic" is asinine. Now do I think this was an either or scenario, of course not. I don't think Iger said, "OK let's spend 2 billion, what should we spend it on this or that." But considering their business is theme parks and their "goal" is to make guests happy ... it's entirely relevant and crucial to ask, does this enhance our experience over investing in what they are known for?

Its misleading to dismiss my question with the "why don't they give you money" ... that's obviously not grounded in reality. I didn't say, "What if Disney could spend $2 billion dollars on Next Gen or make you the King of the Universe with super powers including flight and x-ray vision." Come on ...

So we can argue about this or that, my point was the great majority of us would answer, NO, to the question, does this enhance our experience.

So to my question ... does this enhance your experience?

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Large additions like those, will certainly have a ROI over time (3 years?), but, the cost of such additions (at least the way Disney does them), is becoming more and more difficult to sell to the executives and investors who don't have the long term patience and want to see immediate returns on their money or at the least, within a year.

I think the phrase "at least the way Disney does them" is key. The entire WWOHP cost $265 million and contains the most high tech E-Ticket on the planet. The New Fantasyland cost $425 million and has no E-Ticket, a mediocre D-Ticket that uses a 50 year old ride system and a highly themed kiddie coaster.

Maybe they should fix their process not abandon building attractions. I mean it is a theme park after all. Eventually they are gonna have to build rides....eventually....maybe.

And you think that this $1.5 Billion Boondoggle they have on their hands was LESS risky than maintaining the current parks and building new and exciting attractions?

 

[tomman710]

Sure they could have, and some of it actually is going toward plussing the parks, just not in the way we (the fans) would actually prefer. They're adding small incremental changes and enhancements via interactive elements throughout.

See that's my point, I think we are on the same page ... yes I know its rhetoric when they say "enhance the guest experience" ... but I am saying that all of us, no matter what side we land on about NextGen agree that this won't enhance our experience.

Granted they don't have to take our advice or ideas and I am not asking them to ... all I was saying is we are all arguing back and forth when in reality we all aren't that far apart because we agree this doesn't enhance our personal experience.

 

[flynnibus]

So to my question ... does this enhance your experience?

If that is your true question - the money spent on it is immaterial. The references to Iger and 2 billion are distractions to your question. Whether or not you are conscious of it, your way of presenting the question is to bias the response.

If you truly want to ask the question above.. ask it as you just posed it. Exclude all other factors beyond does this actually improve your park experience?

Do you worry about how much each firework shell costs when you decide if you like a show or not?
Do you care who the show designer was when you decide if you liked an attraction or not?

You don't clutter the question with biases if you truely want a clean answer.

We've seen lots of examples where MyMagic+ will improve the offerings - I doubt many people question that. The problem for people is not seeing the positives, but rather the weighing of the negatives against the positives.