Big changes coming to FASTPASS in March

Do you agree with the changes to the FASTPASS enforcement policy?

  • Yes

    Votes: 544 58.5%
  • No

    Votes: 233 25.1%
  • I'm going to wait and see how it works

    Votes: 153 16.5%

  • Total voters
    930

flynnibus

Premium Member
Since no FP people were coming, and the line from the inside part of the queue didn't snake around the corner down to the merge, there was really no reason to hold up the stand by line... If they allowed standby in when no FP are coming, then the wait would have been more to the 45 min posted time... Maybe a few minutes less...

This was to show an instance when FP did negatively affect the wait time for standby....

But it didn't... that's the point. If someone in front of you sits on the phone and talks 5 minutes in the queue.. and no one gets past her, while the line moves ahead of her making a big gap. When she gets off the phone and starts moving forward, as long as she and everyone behind her close the gap and catch up to the people in front of her BEFORE the gap hits grouper/load. There is no increase in your wait time - at all.

The only thing that changed is your average speed through the queue. I don't know how else to explain this to you - as long as more people were not put in front of you and no gaps were let through the grouper/load because no one was there to group/load - you have no increase in wait time.

This is the same exact principle that will be used for dumbo. Just because you aren't standing in line or moving forward in a physical line your wait will not increase. They will bring enough people back so that the grouper/load position always has enough of a backlog to ensure there are no gaps in loading.. and everyone else will be free to move around. Only if grouper runs out of people to group will delays be incurred.

The only thing that can impact your wait time in scenarios like this is when you have groups loaded into a captive preshow that causes the line to move in batches - creating a quantizer effect. While the preshow is running, no people are feeding the grouper and there is risk the grouper may run out of people to load. But this is why in modern attractions you see more than one load of people beyond the preshow (or why you have queue in the portrait hall of DL's HM). This avoids the quantizer effect a captive preshow has on a continuous queue of people and avoids having the grouper hit a 'dead space' due to one preshow being light on people vs the next one. Multiple preshows are also used, but even there you keep a queue of people behind the preshow to act like a buffer.

These things like how big a preshow room is, or how long it runs, aren't arbitrary - they are designed to intermesh with the ride's capacity and loading strategies. These things may not be readily apparent to guests but its part of the design of the ride. Ride capacity (as loaded), keeping the grouper 'fed' and people in front of you in line (be it by FP insertions or simply people already in front of you) are what impact your wait times. Not where you wait.. at all. Only if one of those three things were to change does your wait increase. The wait estimate outside is just that.. an estimate.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
The GAC is not a perk but rather a service used by handicapped people to have easier access the various rides, shows, etc.

I understand exactly what the GAC is, my point is that the alternate/fastpass line privilidges of the GAC would be far less complex if that was the new pay service that Disney offered.

Instead Disney seems to be over complicating something that's likely not going to be worth it from a cost standpoint compared to the relative effeciency of the service.

You don't want to base it on ride vehicles, etc.. because that is only a theoretical capacity, not your actual capacity. Your actual capacity is based on your dispatch interval, and how many guests fit per vehicle (which for many rides is dependent on the guests). Then look at how many seats go out empty because of party size mismatches, etc. It's not a reliable measurement if you are trying to make the standby board more reliable.

Trying to set the model based on your current ride configuration would be futile. It's far better to simply measure your actual throughput. Then you average out the guest irregularities and you measure based on your crew's performance, not the theoretical performance.

Measuring guests in the queue as well as recent hourly capacity is still a far more accurate way of determining the standby time than what is currently being done.

In my experience seen from when FP opens for the day. It's 45mins+1hr window. But I may be off there.

Fastpasses return times can be as close as 36 minutes from distribution to the first minute of the return time. When it gets to 35 minutes away, the return time automatically bumps up an additional 5 minutes. This is accelerated when more Fastpasses are distributed in 5 minutes than were allocated to be distributed during that 5 minute interval.

Stupid less relevant question--- What made people think it was okay to use their fastpasses later in the first place?

Not trying to start a fight or anything, just curious. I never knew I could do it until a few months ago on here, as someone visiting the park I just never thought to do it. I could see if you accidentally miss your time, thats different, but for the people that have saved them for the end of the night, how did they know this would be okay? Without having been on these boards, I wouldn't try that because I'd be worried that they wouldn't take them after the time.

Just wondering, maybe I'm just out of it :wave:

There is actually an official cast member policy to accept late arrivals. That is the policy that is changing.

I believe stats I have heard in the past say average attraction counts for guests are more like 12-15 - not 20+. So boosting 25% would only mean 3+ rides.. which is not unreasonable.

And I think you exaggerate with 'because there's not enough time to visit another attraction'

The default return window is typically an hour or more away. That means your return time is at least 1-2 hours away, usually more. You can't enjoy an attraction or eat or tour within 1-2 hours?

If you thought people rode 20-25 attractions a day.. that would be like 2 attractions an hour for people. Yet now you think they can't get something done in an 1-2 hrs? Your own math defeats your point.

Jim Hill mentioned that the break even point on guest satisfaction is typical 10 rides, shows, or attractions.

I'm not a math guy, so help me think this one out: How would FP be impacted if the "next FP available" time was extended? Instead of being able to get a new FP just as your current FP window opens, what if EVERYONE were forced to wait an hour or two after the window opens? (for example, at 10am I get a FP for BTMRR with a window of 2-3pm. My next opportunity to get a FP would not be until 4 or 5pm)

It seems that would immediately cut down on the number of FP's in the park. Fewer opportunities to obtain a FP means fewer people in the FP lines. Fewer people in the FP lines means the Standby line moves faster, getting things closer to life in the pre-FP days. (I also recall that in the early days of Universal's Express Pass, you really would only be able to get 2 or 3 passes a day, with huge gaps of time between the two).

By enforcing the return window and adding additional FP attractions (as it appears Disney is doing), guests would have more choices to strategize their FP use.

The knee-jerk reaction to such limits would probably be for most visitors to cash in their limited FP's at a headliner E-Tickets like Space Mtn. or ToT. But just like now, the slots will fill up quickly. So for most visitors, if you want to burn your FP on one of those E-tickets, you probably won't be able to get any more FP for the day.

In that scenario, the big E-Tickets could have slow Standby lines all day. But the trade off is that other FP attractions (like Peter Pan) will have quicker Standby lines.

A visitor could also decide to wait in the 90 minute Space Mtn. line in exchange for being able to get a few more FP's throughout the day for some of the smaller FP attractions.

At the end of the day, more visitors would have a chance to get a FP for something, while minimizing those commando visitors who snatch up FP's and deprive the uneducated or inexperienced from getting them. With fewer FP's in the system overall, more visitors will be forced to use the Standby lines.

With less demand on the FP lines, Disney could then add in the X-Passes. Although those will slow the Standby lines more, the impact would not be as bad as adding X-Passes under the current system .

That's my theory, anyway. Any holes in my math?

The biggest way this would be affected is that the attractions that have a high demand would probably see an even higher demand for Fastpass. Usually when the return time is less than 2 hours out, the crowds at the attraction aren't particularly high, as such people would be less likely to get Fastpasses that have shorter return times.

As such, by extending out the "get a new fastpass time" on all attractions to 2 hours, you would essentially eliminate the need/demand of Fastpass for attractions that typically only have a 40 minute difference between distribution and return.

I want to make a couple points I made yesterday, since they're buried 10 pages back at this point...

I'm not in favor of this "as described" for one reason, and no one yet has given a reasonable and logical idea against it:

If they're going to enforce the return time window, then make it easy for me to find out what the current distribution time is for each FP attraction around the park.
This is something that is incredibly important. And in today's age, it is unacceptable that Disney doesn't have this information available.

This needs to be addressed as part of Next Gen.
It's noon, and I'm at Space Mountain. I've got a little one that will nap at some point, dinner reservations, and a specific time I need to leave the park for the night. I want Splash Mountain fast passes. Currently, I've got no problem walking all the way to Splash because even if the window doesn't work for me as printed, I can return later and still use them.

With the change they're wanting to make, I have no idea if it's worth walking over to Splash because I don't know if the return window will work for my schedule.
You explained a very logical scenario perfectly. I look at an attraction like Soarin' as another culprit here. Moreso than any other park, days at Epcot are often dictated by dining reservations. Your Soarin' Fastpass distribution is often more than 2 hours out and the tip board in Future World West is never accurate.

Most attraction signs are digital, and they are all linked to the red card system which is also electronic. I refuse to believe that Disney lacks the capability of linking all of this to accurate tip boards, and smart phone apps. They are looking to add RFID technology all over the parks yet are incapable of setting up a very primative network to communicate ideas to guests - this is laziness and nothing more.

Knowledge is power. If they're going to do this, they should have a board in each land and one in the hub that shows the current FP distribution return times. Something like this should be in place before they flip the switch on this... But obviously there won't be.

I also want to make this point clear:

They are NOT making this change to help out the folks in the stand by lines. They are making this change because of a bigger picture that ultimately will mean that you'll either have to pay more for the perks, or you'll be standing in the standby line watching others that HAVE paid for this perk pass you by.

A lot of you praising this change are doing so because you feel like you've been "following the rules" and everyone else should too, or you think that by enforcing the return window your standby line experience will improve. MARK MY WORDS: IT WON'T BE THAT SIMPLE.

Everyone knows there will be more to it than this... And I just ask everyone to remember that when they praise this change.

Be careful what you wish for.

The change is fine - it disrupts my touring, but I'll live. Accurate tip boards have been long over due. The tip boards that they have now are altogether useless. If they're not going to be accurate, then they shouldn't have them at all.

For this one.. you're arguement of why this is important is to avoid having to walk to the ride and risk not being able to participant. Why is FP any different from standby in this regard?

People managed to survive walking around the park without Tip Information in every land both pre and post fastpass.

What are you are asking for are NEW enhancements and shouldn't be held as requirements related to this change in return enforcement at all.
That's a horrible argument. In the days of DACS it was still possible to link a variety of things, now this is something that can be handled by an excel spreadsheet. The need for accurate tip boards has been there, it's just heightened by this change in policy.

Another reason why Disney shouldn't be bowling people over to make this happen? The more efficient you get in the park, the quicker you will move through the park, the sooner you'll be done in the park, and the sooner you'll be arguing 'the park is only a half day park, we need more things to do'. There needs to be a balance between 'slowing the customer down to see your product' and customer satisfaction. Customers moving by at 55mph don't stop and buy stuff. Customers in the park half as long as others are less likely to buy stuff. In some degrees, making your stay longer is all about ensuring Disney gets the max value for their investment and they increase impressions for marketing/sales.
What this is accomplishing is a leveling of the playing field. Say that hypothetically your average Disney Fan Boy was able to tour 50% more efficiently than the casual guest prior to the policy change in Fastpass return time. Now that same guest will still be more efficient, just not 50% more.

On that note, how come no one is called TDO a bunch of communists yet? There's already been other outlandish statements.

I do think that this policy change is likely to result in an increase in spending as people will likely "kill time" in the area to avoid back tracking.
 

Gator

Active Member
And that's fine. But there's no reason to take it out on the CM like you said you would do. Instead, respect the CM and their position and politely ask for a manager. Then tell the manager you aren't happy and MAYBE they'll do something to make it better. There's no need to embarrass someone just trying to do their job, especially when they have no control over what you do, or what the rules are.

Yes, of course. :ROFLOL:When it comes down to it, I wouldn't yell. I feel like yelling right now, and if a CM had an attitude about me missing my time, I might. Doens't take away my anger, though.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
But it didn't... that's the point. If someone in front of you sits on the phone and talks 5 minutes in the queue.. and no one gets past her, while the line moves ahead of her making a big gap. When she gets off the phone and starts moving forward, as long as she and everyone behind her close the gap and catch up to the people in front of her BEFORE the gap hits grouper/load. There is no increase in your wait time - at all.

The only thing that changed is your average speed through the queue. I don't know how else to explain this to you - as long as more people were not put in front of you and no gaps were let through the grouper/load because no one was there to group/load - you have no increase in wait time.

This is the same exact principle that will be used for dumbo. Just because you aren't standing in line or moving forward in a physical line your wait will not increase. They will bring enough people back so that the grouper/load position always has enough of a backlog to ensure there are no gaps in loading.. and everyone else will be free to move around. Only if grouper runs out of people to group will delays be incurred.

The only thing that can impact your wait time in scenarios like this is when you have groups loaded into a captive preshow that causes the line to move in batches - creating a quantizer effect. While the preshow is running, no people are feeding the grouper and there is risk the grouper may run out of people to load. But this is why in modern attractions you see more than one load of people beyond the preshow (or why you have queue in the portrait hall of DL's HM). This avoids the quantizer effect a captive preshow has on a continuous queue of people and avoids having the grouper hit a 'dead space' due to one preshow being light on people vs the next one. Multiple preshows are also used, but even there you keep a queue of people behind the preshow to act like a buffer.

These things like how big a preshow room is, or how long it runs, aren't arbitrary - they are designed to intermesh with the ride's capacity and loading strategies. These things may not be readily apparent to guests but its part of the design of the ride. Ride capacity (as loaded), keeping the grouper 'fed' and people in front of you in line (be it by FP insertions or simply people already in front of you) are what impact your wait times. Not where you wait.. at all. Only if one of those three things were to change does your wait increase. The wait estimate outside is just that.. an estimate.

This is another thing that I don't understand why people get so upset about. Yes, you should keep the line moving, but a tightly packed queue doesn't mean that you're getting on the ride any faster. As long as the line boarding the attraction remains unbroken then the wait time won't change.

Where this becomes an issue is at attractions that have preshows in the middle of the queue. Attractions like The Haunted Mansion, Test Track and Tower of Terror need to build up a queue after the pre-show in order to maximize efficiency.

Somehow capacity has decreased at Space Mountain since the addition of the games, and this has become a fear over at Test Track. There really is no excuse for this though other than the cast member at the Fastpass/Standby "merge" point should be able to handle this issue.

Where it becomes a bit of an issue is at The Haunted Masion now that ECVs can now fit in the stretch room. This means less guests can fit in the stretch room and they can't push guests through quicker than the capacity of the ride itself.
 

Buried20KLeague

Well-Known Member
Even if it is just about X-pass and the money, I have no issue with it.

Unless Disney totally eliminates the free Fastpass system for X-Pass (which I don't think I've read anywhere talking about the rumors of what it might be), adding additional perks to people willing to pay for it is nothing new.

You pay more to stay on-site at Disney but you get Extra Magic Hours, Transportation etc.



Just playing devil's advocate here:

What if the intent of X-Pass is to add 30% more fastpasses overall to the system each day, thereby making both stand by and FP waits increase?

What if the intent of X-Pass is to SUBTRACT 30% of the total fastpasses currently given out free, making them "pay only" benefits, thereby decreasing your chances of being able to receive a FP for any given attraction in a day by 30%?

What if X-Pass is never offered to AP holders... Only to Deluxe guests and DVC members?

If they do something like the above, will you still be in favor of it?

I'm not saying this will happen... I'm just thinking of possible impacts to the system, and what they might have up their sleeves.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
You're changing the context of my concern. My concern isn't that: "I've got an hour before having something scheduled to do, so do I walk over there and get in a standby line RIGHT NOW and use that hour to wait in line". My concern is if the FP return time even makes it POSSIBLE for me to use them later on. If I choose to walk across the park to get in a stand by line, I know what I'm in for, plus at the hub I can get an idea of the stand by length if I need to.

The risk is the same.. you are putting an investment up front (your time an energy to cross the park) .. and risking that by crossing the park for 'something' that you do not know until you get there if you will be able to get it.

For FP it's can get I a FP I can use within my time constraints
For SB it's can I get on the ride within my time constraints

In both cases, you get to the ride, evaluate what you see, and there is a risk what you see is not compatible with what you have. If the FP conflicts later.. or if SB conflicts now.. it really doesn't matter. Both the investment and possibility of failure are the same (FP has a slight advantage because your investment can be reapplied to jump in SB if your FP bet didn't pay off). Be it the time you want to ride is now or a window later is not really relevant. In both cases you put up an investment, risking that it might be lost if what you find when you get there is incompatible with your requirements.

The Tip Board in the MK is only in one place... it's a long way out of your way in many scenarios (space to peter pan, etc). So really... this quandary you propose is no different then what you deal with every day in the parks.

Would it be nice to not have to put that investment out there at all before you know if the outcome is compatible with your requirements? YES

Is this inconveniencing guests more? Only if you make the assumption that return times were not enforced. It's not inconveniencing you more then going to rides with standby lines either. So in that respect, it's almost leveling the playing field back to what it was.

But as I outlined before, the business has a vested interest in making sure you are not the most efficient you possibly can be in the park. This is part of the design of the park as well.

I fully expect FP availability to be shown on future Tip boards - if they show the return time or not I'm not sure. You get into 'too much information' problems in your User Experience and I'm betting they hold it back as a value added service to sell via smartphones or other services.
 

jeff59rt

Member
Wait in line...

I am sure every poster on here has ridden every single ride at WDW a least 1 time. Why not wait in just one line so someone that has never been to the most magical place on earth can for once get a fast pass to a ride. Then maybe they can ride everything at least once like everyone here!......
 

Buried20KLeague

Well-Known Member
I do think that this policy change is likely to result in an increase in spending as people will likely "kill time" in the area to avoid back tracking.

I propose different.

We all know that the itent of FP initially was Disney thought if we weren't standing in line, there was a higher probability that we would be spending money in a shop or on food. The general consensus is that the end result was people spending that time in line for other attractions instead.

I think it makes sense that Disney saw this, is frustrated that they're not seeing the "return" on FP like they hoped they would, so they're finding a way to charge for a FP service directly.

Almost as if to say "Fine... You don't want to play it our way, we'll fix that!"
 

MrToad_At_BLT

New Member
All very good and interesting questions. All of which everyone would have a different view on based on a number of factors, but for me:

Just playing devil's advocate here:

What if the intent of X-Pass is to add 30% more fastpasses overall to the system each day, thereby making both stand by and FP waits increase?
I can say that if this is the plan it's absolutely a mistake. Obviously worst case scenario is that these 30% all are purchased. But absolutely at some point of X-Pass sales this would add on some significant time.

What if the intent of X-Pass is to SUBTRACT 30% of the total fastpasses currently given out free, making them "pay only" benefits, thereby decreasing your chances of being able to receive a FP for any given attraction in a day by 30%?
I have no problem whatsoever with this. If people are willing to and have the means to pay for this benefit then I can't see why this is an issue. Based on the time of year I'm going, how long I'll be going for, what type of trip I'll have I can then weight the pros and cons of making the purchase or not.

What if X-Pass is never offered to AP holders... Only to Deluxe guests and DVC members?
Full disclosure I'm a DVC member, but I'll try to answer this objectively. I don't think it would be fair to leave the AP holders out of this, that would be a real mistake. As far as only making it be available to some of the resort guests, it's probably selfish of me to say but if I were paying more (significantly in some cases) to stay at Disney I think it's only fair that I receive additional benefits. I'm not sure if I would say 'Deluxe' only but if I don't see anything wrong with Disney adding a perk to entice people to spend more money on accommodations.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
I'm not saying this will happen... I'm just thinking of possible impacts to the system, and what they might have up their sleeves.

Here's my theory...

They tighten the ship predicting the system is running way under efficency now because they must run under capacity to allow enough slack room to deal with surges, etc.

So they tighten the ship up.. with the expectation that they can get X% of additional FPs distributed without majorly impacting existing operations. Let's pick a number.. 10% additional capacity they can get for 'free' by just running as intended.

Now take that 10% and that becomes your pool for Xpass capacity to sell as part of a bundled service that includes what almost appears like a VIP experience. You have premier access to all the places you want to go.. your vacation is all laid out for you, etc. Disney sets up conceirges to help people lay out the 'dream vacation' blah blah blah. Disney charges a STEEP premium for this.

In a phase II, you now start adding attraction interactions with Xpass, etc like what has been discussed before. Now you've gotten some experience with the system.. so now it's time to open it to a wider audience. Now, you split Xpass into multiple tiers. You keep your ultra premium experience that has certain value adds, but create a lower tier.. that maybe is much like FP today but includes the ride personalizations you just rolled out. This is something you make available to all guests, but maybe you bundle it for free if you book a disney vacation package or just hotel.

Now where would that leave FP as it stands today? You might pull it out all together.. if you make the lower tier Xpass so similar to FP, you don't need FP. What about 'free FP'? Maybe competition dictates you no longer need to offer free.. but you can sell it for a nominal fee ($20).


Now how does can this be even more 'Mr Burns'? Instead of just finding capacity with new efficiency, you decide you can increase capacity even further by reducing existing FP pools or greater % of ride capacity dedicated to FP/XP.

But my theory is.. Disney is not interested in investing in a huge new way to experience the parks and do it for free. They will keep XPass phase I as a premium experience where the high volume is not there, but allows them to charge a significant premium for the exclusivity.
 

Buried20KLeague

Well-Known Member
The risk is the same.. you are putting an investment up front (your time an energy to cross the park) .. and risking that by crossing the park for 'something' that you do not know until you get there if you will be able to get it.

For FP it's can get I a FP I can use within my time constraints
For SB it's can I get on the ride within my time constraints

In both cases, you get to the ride, evaluate what you see, and there is a risk what you see is not compatible with what you have. If the FP conflicts later.. or if SB conflicts now.. it really doesn't matter. Both the investment and possibility of failure are the same (FP has a slight advantage because your investment can be reapplied to jump in SB if your FP bet didn't pay off). Be it the time you want to ride is now or a window later is not really relevant. In both cases you put up an investment, risking that it might be lost if what you find when you get there is incompatible with your requirements.

The Tip Board in the MK is only in one place... it's a long way out of your way in many scenarios (space to peter pan, etc). So really... this quandary you propose is no different then what you deal with every day in the parks.

Would it be nice to not have to put that investment out there at all before you know if the outcome is compatible with your requirements? YES

Is this inconveniencing guests more? Only if you make the assumption that return times were not enforced. It's not inconveniencing you more then going to rides with standby lines either. So in that respect, it's almost leveling the playing field back to what it was.

But as I outlined before, the business has a vested interest in making sure you are not the most efficient you possibly can be in the park. This is part of the design of the park as well.

I fully expect FP availability to be shown on future Tip boards - if they show the return time or not I'm not sure. You get into 'too much information' problems in your User Experience and I'm betting they hold it back as a value added service to sell via smartphones or other services.

I completely disagree on your standby vs. FP argument... If for no other point than I've always got some sort of idea of a standby line length based on knowledge of the parks, time of day, crowd size, etc... FP is virtually impossible to predict. Plus, the way it is now, there is no risk my walk across the park would be in vain. With the change, there IS that risk. That's why I feel they need to account for that type of scenario and post the info as I've suggested. But we'll keep going back and forth, so I suggest we agree to disagree. I do feel like this point is logical and not greedy at all... Not like, say, complaining because I might get out of dinner late. I see that as "on me"... I'd just like the ability to have the information to make an informed decision ahead of time, that's all.

You're probably right that they'll provide this info by some "premium" pay service down the road. Which I think is pretty sad... I really believe this is going to create a multi-class system, which I really don't like seeing in my local Six Flags, let alone the Disney parks. (I know there's already a bit of a multi-class system, but I'm worried this next gen stuff will really make it worse)
 

Buried20KLeague

Well-Known Member
Here's my theory...

They tighten the ship predicting the system is running way under efficency now because they must run under capacity to allow enough slack room to deal with surges, etc.

So they tighten the ship up.. with the expectation that they can get X% of additional FPs distributed without majorly impacting existing operations. Let's pick a number.. 10% additional capacity they can get for 'free' by just running as intended.

Now take that 10% and that becomes your pool for Xpass capacity to sell as part of a bundled service that includes what almost appears like a VIP experience. You have premier access to all the places you want to go.. your vacation is all laid out for you, etc. Disney sets up conceirges to help people lay out the 'dream vacation' blah blah blah. Disney charges a STEEP premium for this.

In a phase II, you now start adding attraction interactions with Xpass, etc like what has been discussed before. Now you've gotten some experience with the system.. so now it's time to open it to a wider audience. Now, you split Xpass into multiple tiers. You keep your ultra premium experience that has certain value adds, but create a lower tier.. that maybe is much like FP today but includes the ride personalizations you just rolled out. This is something you make available to all guests, but maybe you bundle it for free if you book a disney vacation package or just hotel.

Now where would that leave FP as it stands today? You might pull it out all together.. if you make the lower tier Xpass so similar to FP, you don't need FP. What about 'free FP'? Maybe competition dictates you no longer need to offer free.. but you can sell it for a nominal fee ($20).


Now how does can this be even more 'Mr Burns'? Instead of just finding capacity with new efficiency, you decide you can increase capacity even further by reducing existing FP pools or greater % of ride capacity dedicated to FP/XP.

But my theory is.. Disney is not interested in investing in a huge new way to experience the parks and do it for free. They will keep XPass phase I as a premium experience where the high volume is not there, but allows them to charge a significant premium for the exclusivity.

You may well be correct. The frustrating part is we'll never know how they're working the numbers and where that X-Pass capacity comes from.

I'm concerned that they'll just take the current FP available number and decrease it by whatever percent, and that's that. It seems like that is the easiest solution... And often times the easiest solution is the one chosen.
 

David S.

Member
There are numerous reasons, far too many to mention, but I will cite a few:

a) The return time is for say, 10 AM but the ride is still a total walk-on in standby at this time. Using the FP during the return time in this instance is essentially throwing it away, since it won't actually save you any time. Use standby again, take your walk-on, and save that FP for later in the day when the line will likely be significantly longer and you may be in the mood for a reride.

The solution is not get a FP then. This is easily the lamest excuse for using an expired FP.

But you already have it. You got it just in case you would need it, and when arriving at the attraction, you realize you don't need it yet. In any case, it isn't lame and it isn't an excuse. When you are told you aren't breaking any rules by doing this, you don't need an "excuse". It is, however, a common-sense touring strategy.

b) You start the day with Space Mountain (or Everest, Rock and Roller Coaster, etc) and ride multiple times in a row right after rope drop, while the ride is still a walk-on. While standing next to the FP machine first thing in the morning, you get a FP for later just in case you decide to ride again much later in the day, when the lines are much longer. Maybe you will make it back to this attraction and maybe you won't, but if you do finish everything else you want to do in the park to make it back for an encore much later, that FP acts as an "insurance policy" that a potential 90 minute wait will be just 5-15 minutes instead. And the reason you don't go back for your "1 hour window" is because you already just rode the same ride 2 or 3 times less than an hour ago, and at this point you are in another part of the park, eager to do OTHER things.

Not much different than above. Again, it's selfishness at its finest. Another lame excuse for using an "expired" FP.

Not selfish nor a "lame excuse". See above.


c) You are visiting with family (or in my case, they are visiting me). They aren't "early birds", but if one person in the group (ie, me) is, you can go to the park at rope drop and have them meet up with you later. Using YOUR ticket, you can get a FP for 1 or more people in the group who isn't there, one at a time, until you have one for each person in the party. Because you only used your ticket to get the passes for said attraction, they will all be for different times, but since they've always allowed the passes to be used anytime between the first time and park closing, the entire group can ride together, when the others in your party/family/friends finally make it to the park and the time for the last FP ticket opens up.

Another lame excuse. If people want a FP, they should get it themselves when they are in the park.

So giving some of my FPs to others on a once in a lifetime trip is now wrong because they weren't in the park to get them themselves? By that logic, you shouldn't give away any of your extras that you aren't going to use to any strangers as a good samaritan gesture, if they weren't in the park before FPs ran out.

d) You are at Hollywood Studios. This, more than any other WDW park, is a show park, and seeing all the shows you want to see in one day already means doing a lot of backtracking to make sure you can line them all up and get them all in. Beauty and the Beast, Playhouse Disney, Little Mermaid, Indy, Lights Motors Action, the 3'o clock parade, American Idol, Jedi Training Academy, etc, are all things that take place at set times. Once you figure out a strategy to make sure you get all the shows you want to see done that day, you may often find yourself with times of 15 or 20 minutes to kill between shows, which isn't really enough time to guarantee doing any of the attractions at that park, even with a FP. But since Disney allows "late" arrivals, if your 1 hour window occurs during a period where you are getting all the shows done, you may indeed find it beneficial to save that FP for much later in the day, when it won't conflict with any of the showtimes you want to see.

These are just a few obvious examples I can think of off the top of my head, all based on personal experience. I could list more, but you get the idea ;)

This is the only one where I agree that it may be difficult to plan even with FPs. But again, before you get a FP, the return window is clearly displayed, so if it conflicts with anything, don't get it. This isn't rocket science.

Under the old system where I know it will be accepted until closing and that Disney didn't consider this "rulebreaking", why in Hades should I NOT get it? Because it doesn't conform to your own personal opinions of what constitutes the acceptable ethical uses of a FP? This isn't nuclear physics!

The thing is that none of these examples are legitimate reasons for using a FP after the return window. They are almost all selfish excuses. Yes, we all like to go on our favorite rides multiple times, and FPs can aide that. But it's not an entitlement.

Who said it was an "entitlement". These are ALL legitimate and are not "selfish". What you fail to grasp is when a manager wearing a Disney nametag, dress clothes, and a tie looks into your eyes, gives you a reassuring smile, and tells you "Don't worry about the second time on the pass. We are only concerned that you arrive after the first time. You can use your fastpasses anytime between the first time and park closing, and it is not considered "breaking the rules" to miss your window". When you are told that, multiple times, why in Hades should I feel guilty, "entitled", or "selfish" for using a FP "late" for ANY of the above reasons when I've been told it is perfectly OK to do so by those WHO MATTER in the park?

Should I take his words (and the words of countless other CMs, including others on the management level), with a grain of salt, and say to myself, "Well, in the last 6 years, over 20 managers and 50 front line CMs have told me it was not "against the rules" to use a FP late, but because Fosse and some other fans on WDWMagic think it is wrong and "selfish", I will police myself and follow a "rule" that in Disney's eyes, did not even exist? (although I know it apparently will on March 7)

GET REAL!

Riddle me this. If I'm so "selfish", how come every time a guest outside an attraction offers me their FP/s, saying they won't be able to use them before they expire because their husband/wife/significant other/child/friend won't make it back to the ride in time, so they now have an extra, I've ALWAYS explained to them to keep their FP/s, because they are good past that hour, and don't expire until closing?

If I'm so horrible and selfish and only out to get on as many rides as possible, why didn't I take their FPs, and leave them in the dark that they can still use them? And believe me, this has happened to me MANY times.

It isn't all about me. I would prefer ALL guests to be able to enjoy the greater flexibility the current system allows. I didn't get any satisfaction out of knowing something that many didn't.

Just like I applaud Sea World's decision to make Sky Tower free for all guests, even though when it was free only for passholders the lines were shorter. (I have a Platinum AP for Busch Gardens/Sea World)
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Most attraction signs are digital, and they are all linked to the red card system which is also electronic. I refuse to believe that Disney lacks the capability of linking all of this to accurate tip boards, and smart phone apps. They are looking to add RFID technology all over the parks yet are incapable of setting up a very primative network to communicate ideas to guests - this is laziness and nothing more.

Laziness - or controlling you? As much as people harp about wishing for the grander days of less park commandos and more taking time to smell the roses... putting more and more info to make you even more machine like doesn't help the cause.

Let's face it.. there is no reason Disney couldn't have put FP in a central place to start, or during it's many tweaks - yet they insisted on putting more FP machines out in places where they don't even necessarily have room for them. I think this points to specific intent - and not just being oblivious to the requests.

Disney COULD give you wait times and FP return times everywhere.. including in your pocket. Heck, they could have done it via SMS updates years ago too.. but they haven't.

Just because you CAN doesn't always mean you SHOULD in business.

Look at the interactive artwork we have now. Disney could easily build a perfectly themed Tip board anywhere in the park that would look STUNNING and play to things like the land.. imagine 'wanted' posters showing attraction times in Frontierland, etc.

I doubt it's money, technology, or even ideas holding them back at all - but more about business choices.


That's a horrible argument. In the days of DACS it was still possible to link a variety of things, now this is something that can be handled by an excel spreadsheet. The need for accurate tip boards has been there, it's just heightened by this change in policy.

It's not horrible at all. It's part of design and marketing. Face it.. the quicker people get through a park, the less satisified they are with it and demand more from the park. How many times have we heard that about DCA and Universal Studios? 'I did everything I wanted in 4hrs and then I left'. That is NOT what a company wants after dumping hundreds of millions into a place. Giving you the most streamlined, efficent path may make sense from a consumer view - but it doesn't always from a business view.
 

Fractal514

Well-Known Member
I propose different.

We all know that the itent of FP initially was Disney thought if we weren't standing in line, there was a higher probability that we would be spending money in a shop or on food. The general consensus is that the end result was people spending that time in line for other attractions instead.

I think it makes sense that Disney saw this, is frustrated that they're not seeing the "return" on FP like they hoped they would, so they're finding a way to charge for a FP service directly.

Almost as if to say "Fine... You don't want to play it our way, we'll fix that!"

Nothing here indicates that they will be charging for FP. I think the bigger issue is with people who got early FP and then didn't use them until much later, thus crushing the FP lines at the end of the day.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
I completely disagree on your standby vs. FP argument... If for no other point than I've always got some sort of idea of a standby line length based on knowledge of the parks, time of day, crowd size, etc... FP is virtually impossible to predict

We already know standby time is only available in limited places as provided by Disney. And why is your standby knowledge so good, but not about FP? That doesn't make a lot of sense. You know which ones are going to be in demand or not. Just like SB you don't know precisely, but you have a general idea that some rides are going to be hours out while others will be probably 2hrs out, etc.

Plus, the way it is now, there is no risk my walk across the park would be in vain. With the change, there IS that risk

Sure there is. The ride could be down. FPs could all be gone. FP could simply not be turned on. FP is so 'unpredictable' you say, yet you say there is no risk at all of not getting one?? Your logic doesn't add up.

The same scenarios apply to SB too. Just because you walked to an attraction doesn't mean you're getting on.. now or later.

That's why I feel they need to account for that type of scenario and post the info as I've suggested. But we'll keep going back and forth, so I suggest we agree to disagree. I do feel like this point is logical and not greedy at all... Not like, say, complaining because I might get out of dinner late. I see that as "on me"... I'd just like the ability to have the information to make an informed decision ahead of time, that's all.

I don't think it's greedy - I just think it's unfair to expect this new and additional information as some sort of dowery to make this change more acceptable. The issue you are concerned over really isn't unique to FPs with a fixed return time. It's an issue for every attraction regardless of FP. FP with no return time just made it less of a concern because it gave you more flexibility. But it didn't remove the risk, nor really add new ones - just which apply where.

You're probably right that they'll provide this info by some "premium" pay service down the road. Which I think is pretty sad... I really believe this is going to create a multi-class system, which I really don't like seeing in my local Six Flags, let alone the Disney parks. (I know there's already a bit of a multi-class system, but I'm worried this next gen stuff will really make it worse)

I've never understood all the hype over 'multi-class'. We already have it in the parks today.. upsells everywhere... tours.. VIPs... Deluxe hotels vs value hotels.. etc. As long as Disney continues to deliver value for the non-premium offerings... I really don't care that there are other offerings above and beyond what I paid for.
 

draybook

Well-Known Member
Nothing here indicates that they will be charging for FP. I think the bigger issue is with people who got early FP and then didn't use them until much later, thus crushing the FP lines at the end of the day.



We must be talking about peak season then because I've never seen FP lines "crushed" at the end of the day in September, December or in March. Not in any park and we always stay beyond closing so I would think we would notice it.
 

Rasvar

Well-Known Member
I guess I am missing something but a lot of the status information is already available on apps. By both Disney and Third parties. I'm sure if this goes into effect, someone will modify the third party time apps to include FP window times based on crowd sourced info. We know that Disney has the tech to provide the info. They already do it. But you have to be through the proper provider.

If there is a demand for more information on wait times and FP times, you can bet that Disney will hear about it. They will probably try to make money on it. That is what they do.

Disney will not just throw these changes out there and ignore the consequences. If there are complaints, they will get addressed. I really think in a lot of ways, too much is being made of this change. Yes, I feel pretty certain it is in prep for x-Pass. Yes, x-Pass will be for money. There will be a tiered service level. It is not uncommon. You get more service for the level of money you pay. It is like the corporate hospitality suites. More perks. Annual passholder - discounts. Who gets it the worst, the person who comes and buys a one day ticket. (Does anyone even buy the rack rate one day ticket anymore?)

When all is said and done, I really doubt the change will be of a major effect except to someone like me who would load up on Fastpasses in the morning and then use them in the evening or later in the day. There will be tweaks based on customer response. I'll deal with the change. When I am traveling in groups, I will probably actually like the harder windows. It can be like herding cats at times. At least there will be something to fight inertia and chaos. :animwink:
 

Buried20KLeague

Well-Known Member
Nothing here indicates that they will be charging for FP. I think the bigger issue is with people who got early FP and then didn't use them until much later, thus crushing the FP lines at the end of the day.

I'm not even going to respond to this. You've so far off point it's not worth it.
 

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
Would these be the same CM's that are allowing it and are trained to allow it? Thank you for at least confirming that Disney is responsible for this mess, not the people that use the system.
CM's are trained to generally not "advertise" that you can use the Fastpass any time after the start of your window, but to allow any late arrival in, no questions asked.

Are you suggesting we should blame the hourly CM's who are just doing what management has asked them to do?
This is why WDW takes away the freedoms we enjoy: people who hate everyone else at "their" Disney World - like this.
So are you suggesting that threatening CM's over something that is not their decision to enforce in any way, shape, or form is acceptable behavior? Just because we live in the age of " you, got mine" doesn't mean that having an attitude of "I'm gonna up a storm until I get my way" should be rewarded.

edit: or are you also referring to the poster that I quoted? Its hard to tell.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom