Fast Pass Upgraded?

[tracyandalex]

i don't see anything wrong with a tiered fastpass system. as someone who often stays in a value and only occasionally stays in a deluxe, i understand that deluxe guests get more perks than i do and i'm fine with that, that's why they pay the big bucks. on the other hand, i would be against a system that greatly increased the wait time for others. but, i have full confidence that disney can (if they decide to do a tiered system) come up with a system that will be relatively fair to everyone.

tracy

go yankees!!!!!!!!

 

[Iakona]

While we don't know how a system of this type would be set up, I think there are some fairly basic issues with it that need to be overcome.

First of all, even though the number of fastpasses a non-deluxe resort guest could obtain wouldn't have changed, there would be an overall decrease in the number of fastpasses available to them. Fastpasses are a finite resource. If deluxe-guests could get multiple/unlimited fastpasses, they'd exhaust the supply faster than they do in the current situation. This would therefore decrease the number available to non-deluxe resort guests. Unless I'm missing something, the only way to remedy this would be to increase the overall number of fastpasses available, thus creating huge standby lines.

Next, I can anticipate a guest-relations nightmare when dealing with returning guests. If a guest who had used fastpass under the current system were to visit the parks under this theoretical system, he or she might be annoyed that what was previously a completely free system is now a system affected how much a guest has payed. "If it was free before, why should I have to pay for it now?" True, the arguments of "you get what you pay for" and "Well, the number of fastpasses you can obtain hasn't changed" could be used, but try using this sort of logic on an angry guest. It isn't pretty.

Finally, (and this one might not make a whole lot of sense...but here goes) there's the issue of classism among resort guests. When a guest pays to stay in a Disney resort, they are really paying for two seperate sets of benefits: the benefits of being a Disney resort guest, and the benefits of being a guest at a particular Disney resort. The Disney resort guest benefits generally apply only to things outside of the bounds of their particular resort (EMH, transportation system, etc.). These benefits are the same regardless of which resort the guest is staying at. Then, there are the resort-specific benefits (better pools, more restaraunts, etc.) that generally apply only to things inside that specific resort. These resort-specific benefits do not positively or negatively affect the experience of guests staying at other resorts. A tiered fastpass system would be a resort-specific benefit that would theoretically have a negative effect on the experience of guests at other resorts. This would be yet another guest relations nightmare. (Hope that was relatively clear...)

Sorry if I've been a little long winded on this, and I do believe that those defending the possibility of this type of system have made some good points ("Disney can do what they want," for example), however, I really do think that this would create more problems than benefits.

I follow and agree with your 1st and 2cnd points.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>

<o></o>

However, your 3rd while factual is probably not the lens that the Disney Company is looking at this through. While the argument here has focused on Resort privileges vs. Park privileges there is another consideration that the company as a whole is looking at. The Disney Company is probably looking at capturing the entire tourist dollar. Therefore they want to encourage their guests to not only stay in Disney Resorts, but also the most expensive. It makes perfect sense for the Company as a whole to work towards that end. Adding perks for deluxe resorts encourages more people to stay at that level. Is this classism? I’m not sure. It sounds to me like capitalism. After all if you can’t afford Disney at all then you get no perks.<o></o>

 

[Captain Hank]

However, your 3rd while factual is probably not the lens that the Disney Company is looking at this through. While the argument here has focused on Resort privileges vs. Park privileges there is another consideration that the company as a whole is looking at. The Disney Company is probably looking at capturing the entire tourist dollar. Therefore they want to encourage their guests to not only stay in Disney Resorts, but also the most expensive. It makes perfect sense for the Company as a whole to work towards that end. Adding perks for deluxe resorts encourages more people to stay at that level. Is this classism? I’m not sure. It sounds to me like capitalism. After all if you can’t afford Disney at all then you get no perks.

Oh yeah, I totally agree that a move like this would make sense to the company's bottom line--it would be an incentive for guests to stay at higher priced resorts. What I was trying to say is that Disney might end up alienating a lot of guests because of percieved classism.

 

[PagingTomMorrow]

I am calling for a violation of a modified Godwin's Law invalidating that portion of the arguement dealing with slavery.

i wasnt trying to end the thread i was trying to point out that just because someone is playing by the rules doesnt necessarily make the action or the rule fair... and i didnt mention nazis

 

[jakeman]

i wasnt trying to end the thread i was trying to point out that just because someone is playing by the rules doesnt necessarily make the action or the rule fair... and i didnt mention nazis

I understand that. According to the law in italics, it simply states that the likelihood of the comparision would become greater as the thread progressed. Also, I am aware there were no Nazi, that's way I stated that it was a modified Godwin's Law. I could not find one regarding slavery...but it is in the same spirit: making a point by comparing events or actions that have vastly different scales of severity.

Overall, I understand your point. In my opinion, another example besides slavery could have been used more effectively, such as basketball before the shot clock was installed. It was common for a team to score two or four points and then hold onto the ball for the remainder of the game. Yeah, they played by the rules but it wasn't fair for the other team if they couldn't get the ball. Therefore, they added the shot clock to speed up the game.

I appreciate the point you are trying to make, and even though I don't agree, it does raise a valid perspective that some people may have if this system is ever implemented.

 

[HunnyPot]

cause we all know disney doesnt give a damn about wether or not people enjoy their experience

Are you serious? Disney goes above and beyond to make sure people enjoy their experience. There are countless accounts on this forum of a CM doing something extrordinary for a guest. I am speaking from experience too, and since you are aparently still in High School, I'm going to assume I've been to WDW more than you and had more experiences than you.

 

[PagingTomMorrow]

Are you serious? Disney goes above and beyond to make sure people enjoy their experience. There are countless accounts on this forum of a CM doing something extrordinary for a guest. I am speaking from experience too, and since you are aparently still in High School, I'm going to assume I've been to WDW more than you and had more experiences than you.

umm i was definitely being sarcastic when i said that but ok lol

being in high school doesnt make me dumb by the way

 

[PagingTomMorrow]

I understand that. According to the law in italics, it simply states that the likelihood of the comparision would become greater as the thread progressed. Also, I am aware there were no Nazi, that's way I stated that it was a modified Godwin's Law. I could not find one regarding slavery...but it is in the same spirit: making a point by comparing events or actions that have vastly different scales of severity.

Overall, I understand your point. In my opinion, another example besides slavery could have been used more effectively, such as basketball before the shot clock was installed. It was common for a team to score two or four points and then hold onto the ball for the remainder of the game. Yeah, they played by the rules but it wasn't fair for the other team if they couldn't get the ball. Therefore, they added the shot clock to speed up the game.

I appreciate the point you are trying to make, and even though I don't agree, it does raise a valid perspective that some people may have if this system is ever implemented.

thank you for being understanding... im value this commodity more and more everyday on this forum

 

[Legacy]

umm i was definitely being sarcastic when i said that but ok lol

being in high school doesnt make me dumb by the way

She wasn't saying you are dumb... she was saying she has more experience than you.

 

[CAPTAIN HOOK]

The thing is, thats life. Not every one can afford to fly first class either, but the option is there for those who can.

But they don't arrive at their destination any quicker.
If people want a better quality of accomodation let them pay for it - but this shouldn't entitle them to any perks in the parks over and above someone staying off site - If Disney want to create a "class" or "tier" system in their parks let them - but its going to offend those that can't afford to stay in the luxury resorts

 

[wannab@dis]

But they don't arrive at their destination any quicker.
If people want a better quality of accomodation let them pay for it - but this shouldn't entitle them to any perks in the parks over and above someone staying off site - If Disney want to create a "class" or "tier" system in their parks let them - but its going to offend those that can't afford to stay in the luxury resorts

I cannot afford to stay at the deluxe resorts AND I'm not offended if those that can afford to do so get more amenities and perks than I do.

Of course, I understand that we live in a capitalistic society and not everyone has the same fortunes. That seems to be a hard point for some people to grasp. This isn't about classism; it's about perks, amenities and offering incentives to get people to stay at the highest level of resort as possible.

 

[CAPTAIN HOOK]

This isn't about classism; it's about perks, amenities and offering incentives to get people to stay at the highest level of resort as possible.

Then let Disney offer more perks at the resort where they've paid to stay - once inside the park everyone should be on an equal footing.
Can you imagine four lines of guests for one attraction - one line for luxury guests, one line for moderate guests, one line for value guests and the fourth line for poor people ?

 

[Legacy]

Then let Disney offer more perks at the resort where they've paid to stay - once inside the park everyone should be on an equal footing.
Can you imagine four lines of guests for one attraction - one line for luxury guests, one line for moderate guests, one line for value guests and the fourth line for poor people ?

But it wouldn't be like that.

Whether people want to admit it or not, there is already "classism" at the parks. AP lounges, parking benefits, surprise FastPass, dinner reservations, transportation, time in the park all of these things correlate to how much is spent at Disney. I don't have an AP, and I don't stay on property because my home is 45 minutes away.

I am in the lowest class.

The people with APs who stay at the Contemporary are in the highest class.

Do I envy their perks? To an extent. But I understand that if I spent more money than I could enjoy that class as well.

I have to travel in a parking tram, wait in line at the ticket booths, walk further from my car to the gate, pay more money, and feel the need to get more done because I choose for my time at Disney to be in that class. The only thing keeping me from getting the perks is me.

The class structure is a part of capitalism. That's why we have lower, middle, and upper-class.

If you want blanket equality move to China.

 

[CAPTAIN HOOK]

The class structure is a part of capitalism. That's why we have lower, middle, and upper-class.

But thats life - I go to WDW to escape from reality - Don't you ?

 

[wannab@dis]

But thats life - I go to WDW to escape from reality - Don't you ?

From your point of view then... why should there be different levels of resorts?

 

[Lauriebar]

But thats life - I go to WDW to escape from reality - Don't you ?

I do...but then if WDW were a true escape from my normal life then it wouldn't cost anything at all.

If WDW is anything it is a monument to Capitalism. To me, that's not a bad thing. Yes, some of the "magic" is free for the taking but, for the most part Disney wants as much of your money as you are willing to give them. I live in reality whether inside or outside of WDW.

 

[Legacy]

But thats life - I go to WDW to escape from reality - Don't you ?

Yeah... but I still find myself surrounded by screaming children, high-prices, selfish parents, rain, a hot sun, long lines, smelly people, indifferent emplyees, budget-slashing management, people who don't read, people who can't control strollers, whining, arguing, bickering, complaining and anger.

As much as I go to Disney to escape reality... Disney still IS reality.

 

[thrupaytonseyes]

ignore this one...tried to delete don't know how...same message posted twice

 

[thrupaytonseyes]

I have just been sitting back reading all of these arguments for and against and really here is what I think is the bottom line:

We all pay approximately the same price to enter the parks( I know that it becomes cheaper per day with the more days you buy and more expensive if you add on no expiration and park hopper). Therefore, we should all get the same perks within the park.

When you pay for the deluxe versus the moderate or value you are getting your extra perks within your resort. In other words you are paying for your resort experience not your park experience.

What about the Florida resident who buys an annual pass? This person is a very valued consumer obviously since they frequent the parks often and spend money on food, drinks, etc. Yet this person lives close enough to the park that they have no need for a hotel room. Now because of this he/she would get the same fastpass as somebody staying off property rather than a resort guest even though he/she is a more "loyal" patron?

And yes life is not fair but that doesn't mean that Disney, the place people go to get away from "life", needs to perpetuate that even more. And yes Disney can do what Disney wants to do, but that still doesn't make it right. One of the things people love about Disney is that when you walk through those gates you are treated just as well as the person next to you(assuming the person next to you or yourself isn't being downright mean-spirited to the CMs and others trying to enjoy the experience).

And I agree with others that the perks of EMH and transportation do not take away from the experiences of guests that stay off site or those that live locally and therefore are a nice perk for those staying on site. And unlimited fastpasses would create longer wait times for others, no way around that!

 

[CAPTAIN HOOK]

Because thats life - Hotels are rated by their services,the luxury they offer and their proximity to the beach or where-ever, Cars are priced according to their power, refinements and in the case of marques of distinction - their make, houses are priced by location, view, size and number of room, size of grounds they're set in and their ammenities.
A theme park is a place to go to escape from the trappings of modern life and while in that theme park everyone should be able to enjoy it to the same degree and not have more available to them than someone else.