Disney Genie and Genie+ at Walt Disney World

[Patcheslee]

Ok as an example, take a time when you were playing Sorcerers, and think about what you would have been doing in that time instead. Would you be willing to give up riding Mansion or Pirates or Space Mountain or Mine Train in order to play? Or did you give up some other ancillary experience instead (like sitting on a bench or visiting a theater attraction).

The whole key to solving the capacity issue is making less people want to ride the headliners. To basically devalue them in some way.

What's the height restrictions going to be for GotG and Tron? Those are the only things I can think of off the top of my head that will limit demand a tiny bit.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Logic fails? I'm literally just explaining to you what Disney has already done. What is the more logical answer here: that Disney is completely inept at running a theme park, or you have an incomplete understanding of the decisions they are making. You want to believe that Disney is inept, because you're already decided you are right, but honestly, Disney has access to more information, more understanding and more knowledge on the situation than you do.



So as justification for how they haven't added enough, you list out literally billions of dollars of expansion they have completed. But it's never enough right? They added Pandora, and it had 4 hour long lines. They added Star Wars and it had four hour long lines. They will add Tron and it will have four hour long lines. And the only answer you can conjure is ... let's just keep adding more. It's not the adding more that's the problem, it's the FOUR HOUR long line.




People always complain about losing attractions and shows, but Disney isn't cutting things that are drawing a crowd. They are cutting things that are not meeting their numbers/expectations. Yes things are a little cloudy here because of COVID, but let's be honest: they closed Stitch instead of Pirates because they actually know which rides are working.




I disagree. I think people were just disappointed in Toy Story because it wasn't a billion dollar expansion. Within the fan community there is definitely an expectation that every attraction added needs to be a blockbuster E-Ticket mega-attraction because that's what they want to see. I'm glad you agree, that isn't true.



Yeah we both agree here on the importance of C-Ticket attractions, but the biggest problem here is that, to reduce demand on the E-Ticket attractions, you have to supplant them with those C-Ticket experiences. That's where the disappointment comes in.

Think of it this way: if you went back to a ticket book approach, where people are doled out a certain number of E Tickets and C -Tickets, you could fix the demand profiles in the park overnight. People would generally hate it though, if they were told they could only do X number of E-Tickets in a day.

Or you could have a Fastpass system that allows you a certain number of Tier 1 attractions and Tier 2 attractions.

Or you could have a system where, if you want to experience the Tier 1, you have to dedicate either more time or more money to do so.




Conventional Wisdom in this case is that a high capacity attraction/venue (like a theater show, or a tour ride), do not generate the same level of demand as something like a roller coaster or whatever-new-technology system Disney has this week.

I think the Indy Stunt Show is something that can be attributed to COVID changes that aren't meant to be permanent.




Yeah but taking the example of Disneyland. Disneyland has more attractions than the MK, but is the crowding issue any less at Disneyland? Is a 60 minute wait at Space Mountain somehow different than the 60 minute wait at MK? Isn't Genie+ going to cost MORE money at Disneyland, even if they generally have more supply? How does that work?



I'm not trying to say that it's entirely a negative, I'm saying it doesn't address the crowding problems. It doesn't solve the problem here people are trying to use to justify additional attractions.




Again which is it... is Disney adding capacity and we have a crowding problem, or is Disney NOT adding capacity and we still have a crowding problem. How can you see it as both at the same time?

The fact that MM+ and FP+ cost $2 BILLION...and yet they felt the need to ditch that system and try a different approach by spending another $2 BILLION just 7 years later is proof positive that the system was a failure...and here they are again trying to keep shuffling people around instead of addressing the root problem.

 

[UNCgolf]

OK again it's a simple question: At what point did they add something to the parks that resulted in everyone going "wow the place isn't crowded anymore?"

Never, because they've never come close to adding enough capacity to meet the demand. It's also about far more than just attractions -- the lack of dining capacity (among other things) also contributes to the crowding. I think attraction capacity is the lowest it's ever been at WDW right now. Not in overall numbers (although it might be the lowest it's ever been at EPCOT) but relative to attendance. Attendance has grown much faster than capacity.

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, because I don't think anyone has ever said adding a new attraction will eliminate crowding. Adding new attractions does help spread out the crowds and give everyone more to do, though.

New attractions don't increase attendance enough to offset the added capacity -- if it did, then you wouldn't see lines decrease at other attractions. They do, though. If they added 3 new major attractions to Animal Kingdom, Flight of Passage almost certainly wouldn't have 3+ hour waits anymore. The newest attractions might, but FoP's standby wait would drop to something more reasonable and give more people the chance to ride without waiting in an incredibly long line. That's just one of the benefits to more capacity.

Plus, no one is advocating for them to solely add E tickets. I would love to see 6 or 7 more rides with the overall attention to detail of Na'vi River Journey added to all the parks. People complain about it, but most of what they complain about would bump it from a C to a D or E (it could use a couple more AAs, but when people say it should be 10+ minutes long with a bunch of AAs, well... they're basically saying they want it to be an E ticket instead of what it is). That would make it better, of course, but it's quite enjoyable as is -- it's just not worth the long wait, and it only has that long wait because of an overall lack of capacity. If Animal Kingdom had 6 or 7 other attractions, NRJ would never have a 2 hour wait.

 

[pdude81]

I keep saying that all the random pop-up entertainment, the games like Sorcerers, etc. pull people out of competing for capacity that requires a butt in a seat...have enough things like those throughout the parks, and it adds up quickly and also makes the day feel more well-rounded for the guest.

Oh yes, my family really misses SOTMK. How much money could that have really cost to refurbish or port to a newer OS?

 

[el_super]

The fact that MM+ and FP+ cost $2 BILLION...and yet they felt the need to ditch that system and try a different approach by spending another $2 BILLION just 7 years later is proof positive that the system was a failure...and here they are again trying to keep shuffling people around instead of addressing the root problem.

They didn't spend 2 billion dollars on Fastpass+. They spent 2 billion dollars adding computers, tablets, card readers, network infrastructure, server equipment, applications and TRAINING to their parks and resorts. Things that were desperately needed, like digital room keys, and on-demand wait times aren't going to go away anytime soon.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

They didn't spend 2 billion dollars on Fastpass+. They spent 2 billion dollars adding computers, tablets, card readers, network infrastructure, server equipment, applications and TRAINING to their parks and resorts. Things that were desperately needed, like digital room keys, and on-demand wait times aren't going to go away anytime soon.

I give them $1 billion for the infrastructure upgrades...so we're now at $3 billion instead of $4 billion.

Regardless. FP+ failed. And Genie will now fail, too...because they still aren't addressing the root problem.

 

[el_super]

I give them $1 billion for the infrastructure upgrades...so we're now at $3 billion instead of $4 billion.

Regardless. FP+ failed. And Genie will now fail, too...because they still aren't addressing the root problem.

What is the root problem? Is it lack of capacity or too much demand? Or maybe it's accessibility.

Genie+ is meant to curb demand while maintaining accessibility. It's a fundamentally different problem then overall park capacity or increasing attendance.

If Fastpass+ is a failure, it only failed because it was too popular.

 

[el_super]

Never, because they've never come close to adding enough capacity to meet the demand.

Yes I agree. So why is that being touted as the obvious solution now when it has literally never worked. Not once.

It's also about far more than just attractions -- the lack of dining capacity (among other things) also contributes to the crowding. I think attraction capacity is the lowest it's ever been at WDW right now. Not in overall numbers (although it might be the lowest it's ever been at EPCOT) but relative to attendance. Attendance has grown much faster than capacity.

I can't even begin to contemplate what happened with the dining capacity at Walt Disney World. I do think that's one area where market expectations went completely counter to what theme park operations would dictate.

I do think that attendance has grown faster than capacity, but I disagree that adding more capacity is the answer. I think limiting attendance (or curbing demand) would be the better solutions here, and Disney obviously agrees with that.

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, because I don't think anyone has ever said adding a new attraction will eliminate crowding. Adding new attractions does help spread out the crowds and give everyone more to do, though.

My point is that crowding and long lines isn't being driven by a lack of attraction capacity. There seems to be this false idea that Genie+ would be unnecessary if Disney just added more capacity to the attractions so that every line was just a 10 minute wait. That's never going to happen though.

New attractions don't increase attendance enough to offset the added capacity -- if it did, then you wouldn't see lines decrease at other attractions.
They do, though.

But if that were true, then eventually crowding would just be completely eliminated once a park has had enough additions right? How many rides have been added to Disneyland in the last 65 years? Crowding and wait times are still a problem at Disneyland.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

What is the root problem? Is it lack of capacity or too much demand? Or maybe it's accessibility.

Genie+ is meant to curb demand while maintaining accessibility. It's a fundamentally different problem then overall park capacity or increasing attendance.

If Fastpass+ is a failure, it only failed because it was too popular.

WOW.

ANY line-skipping system is going to fail because they don't have enough hourly capacity to meet demand. You can keep trying to twist the problem into a pretzel as much as you want - the root problem is that they want the parks jammed with people, but don't have the hourly capacity to allow that to happen without guests being miserable and stopping coming. All they're doing with "new systems" (which aren't really new to begin with, they're each just a different spin) is delaying the inevitable.

 

[UNCgolf]

But if that were true, then eventually crowding would just be completely eliminated once a park has had enough additions right? How many rides have been added to Disneyland in the last 65 years? Crowding and wait times are still a problem at Disneyland.

I'm not sure crowding would be eliminated, but long waits mostly would. There might still be a couple of attractions with hour long waits, but if Disneyland had 20 E tickets, 20 D tickets, and 25 C tickets (they're never going to have an attraction count that high, but for illustrative purposes), it's incredibly unlikely you'd see anything with a 2-3 hour wait except maybe when it was brand new.

Regardless, I don't expect there to ever be a time where there isn't some crowding and some rides with longer waits. I do think that a more acceptable capacity figure would lead to much shorter wait times overall, though, and would help with crowding to an extent as more people are on/waiting for attractions at any given time. If the headline attractions have 60 minute waits instead of 120 minute waits, that's a big win for guests.

I do think that attendance has grown faster than capacity, but I disagree that adding more capacity is the answer. I think limiting attendance (or curbing demand) would be the better solutions here, and Disney obviously agrees with that.

Limiting attendance would help, but I don't think there's any reason to believe Disney plans to do that. That would directly decrease overall revenue. They would still need to add more attractions, though, because people are always going to want new experiences and many of the older attractions are still too good/beloved to close and replace.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Limiting attendance would help, but I don't think there's any reason to believe Disney plans to do that. That would directly decrease overall revenue. They would still need to add more attractions, though, because people are always going to want new experiences and many of the older attractions are still too good/beloved to close and replace.

To think Disney would even consider that is ludicrous.

 

[hopemax]

Yeah I see how we're talking about two different things here, although they are definitely related. I generally agree with those statements. At a macro level, there are way too many people going to the parks. At a micro level though, whether the park has 15 million people a year, or 19 million people a year, there will always be a 60+ minute wait for Space Mountain.

It will really be interesting to see if adding Tron convinces people they don't need to ride Space Mountain to have a good time, but I somehow think that won't work out that way.

Going back to the macro level though, it's really interesting to think that the attendance has increased to the point where ride capacity is suffering, because ultimately that should be self correcting, but it hasn't. How long has the overcrowding been an issue in the parks? Why have people continued to flock to the parks if they aren't able to get on the attractions they want? You'd think something would have broke in the last 10 years but here we are...

There will always be a 60 minute wait for Space Mountain because lots of people have expectations that when you go to some places, like a theme park you will have to wait in an hour long line for the most popular things. That calculation is done by people's brains, in advance, and is independent of actual individual attraction capacity. The two have to work together, but individual attraction capacity can’t compensate for people’s psychological decisions. Unless it's so high, that the arrival rate of people can't keep up. But the inability to change people's willingness to queue an hour for a few things is no reason to avoid building something to prevent 120 minutes or 240 minutes by building something people might like more than what they are currently in line for. Or justification for knowing you need 2000+ pph headliners like Universal builds but Disney *chooses* to build ones that are 1400 like FOP and then markets the heck out them, and then someone like you comes around and looks at the size of the line and declares, “There is nothing that can be done.”

As to why people haven’t stopped going when they can’t do the rides they want. Because people can’t figure that out *before* they go. Especially first timers. They can only decide not to come back. And I bet a bunch of them don’t because they didn’t get to do the stuff they wanted. Only then they were replaced with other people who didn’t understand what they won’t be able to do. And the cycle repeats. Only I think it is showing up in Disney’s research because each iteration they make it more impossible for some people to get multiple trips on the same attraction. They are trying to spread things out to as many unique guests as possible.

 

[Disstevefan1]

WOW.

ANY line-skipping system is going to fail because they don't have enough hourly capacity to meet demand. You can keep trying to twist the problem into a pretzel as much as you want - the root problem is that they want the parks jammed with people, but don't have the hourly capacity to allow that to happen without guests being miserable and stopping coming. All they're doing with "new systems" (which aren't really new to begin with, they're each just a different spin) is delaying the inevitable.

The new Genie system is there TO TAKE MORE OF YOUR MONEY .
All systems aside, if you want to ride the rides, I have three suggestions;
ROPE DROP
ROPE DROP
ROPE DROP

 

[el_super]

You can keep trying to twist the problem into a pretzel as much as you want - the root problem is that they want the parks jammed with people, but don't have the hourly capacity to allow that to happen without guests being miserable and stopping coming. All they're doing with "new systems" (which aren't really new to begin with, they're each just a different spin) is delaying the inevitable.

You didn't answer the question. Is the problem a lack of capacity or too much demand? Business 101 dictates that if supply is short and demand is high, prices need to go up. They can raise prices to $200, or $300 a day, and the lines in the park would be "fixed."

So why not just do that? You think Disney is afraid of raising prices?

 

[Touchdown]

The new Genie system is there TO TAKE MORE OF YOUR MONEY .
All systems aside, if you want to ride the rides, I have three suggestions;
ROPE DROP
ROPE DROP
ROPE DROP

Don’t forget close the park too. Post enchanted I’ve been able to hit the frontier mtns, and HM or SDMT consistently if I get 45 min.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

You didn't answer the question. Is the problem a lack of capacity or too much demand? Business 101 dictates that if supply is short and demand is high, prices need to go up. They can raise prices to $200, or $300 a day, and the lines in the park would be "fixed."

So why not just do that? You think Disney is afraid of raising prices?

You haven't been paying attention - they don't want to reduce demand at all. They want as many bodies in the parks as they can get.

 

[flynnibus]

Logic fails? I'm literally just explaining to you what Disney has already done. What is the more logical answer here: that Disney is completely inept at running a theme park, or you have an incomplete understanding of the decisions they are making.

Disney theme park success is intertwined with the Disney universe and the generations of past good will it has built. You don't get to hang their current customer demand on a single item and say "see, its working" - that's asinine. We can also point to the fact Disney keeps trying over and over since 2013 to get a FP system that works in their current environment. If things were so great - they wouldn't be spending all this time and money iterating and trying to relaunch a system... again.

Nor would they be introducing park reservations to manage crowds
Nor would they be telling customers they are raising prices to combat crowding

If Disney wasn't facing a crowding and guest sat problem in the parks - they could have skipped all the above.. but they didn't.

You want to believe that Disney is inept, because you're already decided you are right, but honestly, Disney has access to more information, more understanding and more knowledge on the situation than you do.

Disney leadership isn't necessarily motivated nor incentivized to address the same concerns as others. They were doing great at what they were incentivized to do... Drive demand and drive guest spending. The fact they can run the bus into the wall or run it well past it's scheduled service isn't really their primary concern. Priority #1 is meeting growth goals.

So as justification for how they haven't added enough, you list out literally billions of dollars of expansion they have completed. But it's never enough right? They added Pandora, and it had 4 hour long lines. They added Star Wars and it had four hour long lines. They will add Tron and it will have four hour long lines. And the only answer you can conjure is ... let's just keep adding more. It's not the adding more that's the problem, it's the FOUR HOUR long line.

At AK people waiting in 4hr lines is good for the discussion on hand because that's thousands of people soaked up. People capacity that the park never had. At DHS, no one waited in those lines so Rise didn't act like the sponge, and on top of it the park had lost its two biggest people eater attractions leading up to it. And we know TRON won't have 4hr lines either because it will be basically ILL and virtual.. so it won't be soaking up people beyond the 20mins it will take them to cycle through it. That's a huge problem with these new attractions. Note in my post I said people sponges... not just 'new rides'.

You keep beating this 'brings more demand' mantra because you have a RIDE on the mind and then make generalizations about all attractions because of it.

The problem is like I said in the past post. "The point is it's not enough when you spent 15years choking off what you already had and your additions are largely constrained themselves in their ability to soak up people."

So yes, 'its not enough' when the things you are doing don't address your problem. People have been talking about adding more capacity - attractions that spit people out in 15-20 mins are limited in their ability to soak up people.

People always complain about losing attractions and shows, but Disney isn't cutting things that are drawing a crowd. They are cutting things that are not meeting their numbers/expectations. Yes things are a little cloudy here because of COVID, but let's be honest: they closed Stitch instead of Pirates because they actually know which rides are working.

The important part here is not just cutting them BUT NOT REPLACING THEM. So they literally are compounding their own problem of reducing activities, reducing their people soak capacity, and funneling people together.

The complaint is the reduction in activities people are interested in. Just cutting dead wood doesn't speak to that.

Yeah we both agree here on the importance of C-Ticket attractions, but the biggest problem here is that, to reduce demand on the E-Ticket attractions, you have to supplant them with those C-Ticket experiences. That's where the disappointment comes in.

People can't run at full sensory overload at all times. People can't run at full physical exertion at all times. People don't focus on just one person in their party at all times. The point of attraction variety isn't just to 'not spend as much money' but to round out your offerings. People didn't goto Coral Reef purely because they needed substance... they went as part of their vacation experience. Disney built places like Sci-Fi diner instead of a burger stand for a reason. No one goes 'Damn.. I wish Sci-Fi was Superman the ride instead!'. The experience roster has a purpose in the park and isn't a letdown or only done because of spending less.

Think of it this way: if you went back to a ticket book approach, where people are doled out a certain number of E Tickets and C -Tickets, you could fix the demand profiles in the park overnight. People would generally hate it though, if they were told they could only do X number of E-Tickets in a day.

You do realize people bought individual tickets right? The ticket books were just the discount purchase model.

Second, your hypothetical doesn't work anyway because Disney is building parks without enough e-ticket capacity to even do what you said. Back to our problem... more attendance than they have capacity to soak and maintain a good experience.

Conventional Wisdom in this case is that a high capacity attraction/venue (like a theater show, or a tour ride), do not generate the same level of demand as something like a roller coaster or whatever-new-technology system Disney has this week.

non sequitur - Those attractions do not NEED to 'generate the same level of demand as something like a roller coaster or whatever-new-technology system' -- They need to generate enough demand to keep them busy and effective in their role in the park. Obviously the higher capacity they can soak up the better - but to damn them because they do not equal the headliners is non-sense. Not everything is a headliner!

Yeah but taking the example of Disneyland. Disneyland has more attractions than the MK, but is the crowding issue any less at Disneyland?

Yes

Disneyland has more physical space crowd issues than it does 'so busy I didn't get to ride anything DHS' issues. Disneyland's crowd problems were more operational/infrastructure ... issues like surges in parking, uneven demand, etc.. shaped more by the visiting patterns of large amounts of APs - not just crushing crowds.

Is a 60 minute wait at Space Mountain somehow different than the 60 minute wait at MK?

Yes, because you'll find the wait at Space Mountain at DL will be lower than at MK on average and most of the time. Your comparison is not accurate.

Isn't Genie+ going to cost MORE money at Disneyland, even if they generally have more supply? How does that work?

Because Genie+ pricing at Disneyland is being set to cope with the legacy Maxpass situation and differences in photopass infrastructure.

Again which is it... is Disney adding capacity and we have a crowding problem, or is Disney NOT adding capacity and we still have a crowding problem. How can you see it as both at the same time?

Because 'adding capacity' is a generic statement that is not self supportive. If you are starving and I give you $5... I can't shout down complains you are going hungry because I gave you $5 when you are actually trying to feed yourself more than once.

 

[UNCgolf]

You didn't answer the question. Is the problem a lack of capacity or too much demand? Business 101 dictates that if supply is short and demand is high, prices need to go up. They can raise prices to $200, or $300 a day, and the lines in the park would be "fixed."

So why not just do that? You think Disney is afraid of raising prices?

If they did that and significantly lowered attendance, it would probably cost them money due to lost revenue from food and beverage and merchandise sales. That's a reason to not raise ticket prices too high -- they don't actually want to lower attendance.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It's a fundamental part of the equation here. Do you really think that the MK is at 100% of ride capacity every day? You can't have a serious discussion about theme park operation without considering which under-performing attractions need to be removed.

You can’t have a serious discussion when there are ridiculous notions like trying to run a park at 100% utilization. It’s a recipe for disaster.

OK again it's a simple question: At what point did they add something to the parks that resulted in everyone going "wow the place isn't crowded anymore?"

At what point are you going to understand that crowding is relative? Or do you need to continue the confusion?

 

[Disstevefan1]

Don’t forget close the park too. Post enchanted I’ve been able to hit the frontier mtns, and HM or SDMT consistently if I get 45 min.

Agreed, close to park close you can walk on rides that typically have long standby waits..