Are changes coming to Florida passholder program?

[Mad Stitch]

Considering some of the things Disney labels as an attraction, I'd be concerned which ones are used to block access to the park. Is a new meet and greet grounds for blocking the Florida AP's from the park for 2 months?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

The difference is blocking based on attendance projections (in which case, as many will tell you who don't mind the blockout dates - they wouldn't want to go on those days anyway because of the crowds - like how you wouldn't catch most of us dead there on a major holiday, etc.) and instead basing it on new offerings in the parks, for example, which could be at any time of the year and only serves to get the AP holder to pay more not based on how busy it will be but something much more artificial and more directly exclusionary.

In short, I think people are put off by not having the restrictions being based on a practicality versus what offerings are available.

Basing it on new attractions and basing it on attendance projections are one in the same. New attractions drive attendance, simple as that. The only difference is we'd be talking about park-specific attendance rather than resort-wide attendance.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I understand what your saying, but I dont see how it can be considered a net win in any fashion when the end result is something being taken away.

If the end result is something being taken away, I'd agree. But if this represents a change in the model from resort-wide blockouts to park-specific blockouts, I'd consider that an upgrade.

 

[GlassHalfFull]

I'm not sure its complete park blackout dates... I was told (from a CM) it was blackout dates for AP's to get Fast passes to those new rides... BIG difference... unless they were mistaken, I think this A) not only makes more sense and B) seems like a semi logical step since many non AP's only come once every year or two, or less often.. so Disney wants those to get the chance to FP+ it when they actually do make the trip..

 

[alphac2005]

I'm glad things like this are being published in the Sentinel as it shows that locals are getting a bit fed up with Disney's restrictions, red tape and "discounts" on tickets that keep going up (aka no difference).

Also funny how no Disney spokesperson isn't available to give any feedback whatsoever about this.

I was rather floored by the piece showing up in the Sentinel and was wondering how long the countdown clock was on for Disney to demand a retraction of the article since it actually had an unflattering angle.

 

[DisneyFans4Life]

This is interesting. I wonder if this would have any affect on people who bought a pass without any block out dates?

 

[wdisney9000]

If the end result is something being taken away, I'd agree. But if this represents a change in the model from resort-wide blockouts to park-specific blockouts, I'd consider that an upgrade.

It seems like that would only cause the other parks to be more crowded which negates the whole purpose of trying to control crowd levels in the first place.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

It seems like that would only cause the other parks to be more crowded which negates the whole purpose of trying to control crowd levels in the first place.

No. The issue they're trying to control is the influx of guests visiting specifically for a new ride or attraction. When Avatar opens, blocking DAK isn't going to cause crowd issues at the other three parks because the passholders who would be coming specifically for Avatar would just stay home rather than come fill up the other parks.

They're not trying to control crowd levels in some general sense. They're trying to control crowd levels specifically in parks that would be experiencing unusually high demand. Did you visit New Fantasyland anywhere in the first month or so of opening? It was a nightmare, but the issue wasn't "too many people at Walt Disney World." The issue was "too many people in this one area of one land of one park."

 

[raven]

Basing it on new attractions and basing it on attendance projections are one in the same. New attractions drive attendance, simple as that. The only difference is we'd be talking about park-specific attendance rather than resort-wide attendance.

But say a family in Miami who are AP's are wanting to drive to Orlando to experience s new attraction are going to be blocked out for 2 months. Knowing they are going to be denied access, they will most likely just stay away until then, not go to another Disney park.

And the whole Fat Pass Block Out only issue is pretty much the same as saying you can't go. Everyone knows a FP can make or break a visit for locals. If I can't get the ones I want for the day I want to go, I don't go. That 30-day restriction for APs is already very difficult to get what you want.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

My "other" AP is much better in this regard.

More to the topic, if AP are blocked from something new for all that time wouldn't it just create a rush when the block is lifted anyway?

I think you're right in that it wouldn't have much effect. 7DMT still has long wait lines years after it opened, so what good will keeping AP's away for a few months do? non-AP's will just ride it 4 times LOL.

Unless the primary goal is not really to reduce wait times, but to squeeze extra cash out of AP's - hence the question about if they would be willing to pay extra for it.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

But say a family in Miami who are AP's are wanting to drive to Orlando to experience s new attraction are going to be blocked out for 2 months. Knowing they are going to be denied access, they will most likely just stay away until then, not go to another Disney park.

But at least they'd have the choice, which they wouldn't have if Disney managed the demand via a blanket resort-wide blockout.

And the whole Fat Pass Block Out only issue is pretty much the same as saying you can't go. Everyone knows a FP can make or break a visit for locals. If I can't get the ones I want for the day I want to go, I don't go. That 30-day restriction for APs is already very difficult to get what you want.

That's not true for everyone. I was a local for several years and I went all the time without Fastpasses, as did all of my friends (various levels of passholders, including some CMs). I experienced Test Track 2.0, Star Tours: The Adventures Continue, and New Fantasyland without any FPs.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Honestly, there's one group that this will affect more than anyone and it's the so-called "lifestylers." This forum should be celebrating.

 

[wdisney9000]

No. The issue they're trying to control is the influx of guests visiting specifically for a new ride or attraction. When Avatar opens, blocking DAK isn't going to cause crowd issues at the other three parks because the passholders who would be coming specifically for Avatar would just stay home rather than come fill up the other parks.

They're not trying to control crowd levels in some general sense. They're trying to control crowd levels specifically in parks that would be experiencing unusually high demand. Did you visit New Fantasyland anywhere in the first month or so of opening? It was a nightmare, but the issue wasn't "too many people at Walt Disney World." The issue was "too many people in this one area of one land of one park."

Keeping locals/passholders away from a park hat has a new attraction is 100% crowd control, regardless of Disneys intent, thats all I meant. But in your post to which I responded to, you said that having "park-specific" blockouts would be considered an "upgrade" from simply having resort wide block outs. But as you just said, those pass holders that would be specifically visiting for Avatar (as an example) would just stay home rather than visit a different park. So there goes any type of "win" because we are back to something being taken away. A park-specific block out might as well be resort wide if the passholders intent was to only experience the new attraction/land.

 

[DisneyFans4Life]

But say a family in Miami who are AP's are wanting to drive to Orlando to experience s new attraction are going to be blocked out for 2 months. Knowing they are going to be denied access, they will most likely just stay away until then, not go to another Disney park.

And the whole Fat Pass Block Out only issue is pretty much the same as saying you can't go. Everyone knows a FP can make or break a visit for locals. If I can't get the ones I want for the day I want to go, I don't go. That 30-day restriction for APs is already very difficult to get what you want.

I may be a slightly different annual passholder. We look at the calendar and decide in advance what weekends we want to go (usually 2-3 Saturdays a month) and then get whatever FPs are available. We've never said..."we have got to ride Test Track when we go next weekend" and then cancel the trip because there aren't any FPs available for Test Track.

Likewise, if this were to come to fruition and they were to block us out of a park for a new attraction, we'd just go to a different park. We're also the type that tend to stay away from new attractions because it's so overcrowded to begin with.

We just have the mindset that we do what the park gives us for that particular day and if we miss it this time, we will catch it the next time.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Keeping locals/passholders away from a park hat has a new attraction is 100% crowd control, regardless of Disneys intent, thats all I meant. But in your post to which I responded to, you said that having "park-specific" blockouts would be considered an "upgrade" from simply having resort wide block outs. But as you just said, those pass holders that would be specifically visiting for Avatar (as an example) would just stay home rather than visit a different park. So there goes any type of "win" because we are back to something being taken away. A park-specific block out might as well be resort wide if the passholders intent was to only experience the new attraction/land.

We're talking about two different types of guests. For a guest specifically visiting for Avatar, this change would be either bad (if the alternative is no blockouts) or neutral (if the alternative is a resort-wide blockout). However, for the guests who are visiting for a general Walt Disney World vacation, it's better to be able to be able to attend MK, Epcot, and DHS with DAK blocked out than for Disney to block the entire resort and then that guest can't experience anything.

Maybe I'm incorrect in my assumption that the latter type of guest (primary goal of visiting WDW with secondary goal of visiting specific parks) outnumbers the former type of guest (primary goal of visiting a specific park).

 

[wdisney9000]

We're talking about two different types of guests. For a guest specifically visiting for Avatar, this change would be either bad (if the alternative is no blockouts) or neutral (if the alternative is a resort-wide blockout). However, for the guests who are visiting for a general Walt Disney World vacation, it's better to be able to be able to attend MK, Epcot, and DHS with DAK blocked out than for Disney to block the entire resort and then that guest can't experience anything.

Maybe I'm incorrect in my assumption that the latter type of guest (primary goal of visiting WDW with secondary goal of visiting specific parks) outnumbers the former type of guest (primary goal of visiting a specific park).

I think we are both correct in a sense. But it just feels like Disney is willing to any and everything to alleviate a problem that only has one correct solution, which is too just add to the attraction capacity. They are on the right track with Avatar and SWL but they just need to step up the pace. Paying musical chairs with block out dates for the next several years is not viable solution, IMO of course.

 

[NearTheEars]

Honestly, there's one group that this will affect more than anyone and it's the so-called "lifestylers." This forum should be celebrating.

The true lifestylers have the top tier pass. And will likely shell out whatever it costs to stay free of blackouts.
They aren't slumming it with a Silver pass like me.

 

[Kylo Ken]

Honestly, there's one group that this will affect more than anyone and it's the so-called "lifestylers." This forum should be celebrating.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is a "life-styler?"

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I think we are both correct in a sense. But it just feels like Disney is willing to any and everything to alleviate a problem that only has one correct solution, which is too just add to the attraction capacity. They are on the right track with Avatar and SWL but they just need to step up the pace. Paying musical chairs with block out dates for the next several years is not viable solution, IMO of course.

That's a long-term solution that creates short-term problems and the blockouts are a way to manage the short-term problems. Yes, three to five years from now we'll be looking back on how Avatar increased Animal Kingdom's capacity and helped transform it to a full day-and-night park. But in the immediate one to two months after Avatar's opening, that park is going to be a zoo (pun intended). Anything they do to increase capacity is going to cause surges in attendance for all the people clamoring to experience new attractions (with the obvious exceptions of "unseen" expansions like a new Soarin' theater or Toy Story track).

 

[Mike S]

Honestly, there's one group that this will affect more than anyone and it's the so-called "lifestylers." This forum should be celebrating.

I live close to 3 hours away and this would definitely effect me as I rarely wait months to experience big new rides after they open.

That's a long-term solution that creates short-term problems and the blockouts are a way to manage the short-term problems. Yes, three to five years from now we'll be looking back on how Avatar increased Animal Kingdom's capacity and helped transform it to a full day-and-night park. But in the immediate one to two months after Avatar's opening, that park is going to be a zoo (pun intended). Anything they do to increase capacity is going to cause surges in attendance for all the people clamoring to experience new attractions (with the obvious exceptions of "unseen" expansions like a new Soarin' theater or Toy Story track).

Animal Kingdom has a longer way to go before it's a full day and night park but Avatar is a great first step. The one major thing it "replaced" was Lion King and it simply moved so no lost capacity.