Jeff4272
Well-Known Member
Ok. Martin can you tell us when it’s coming?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
FastPass+ Most Certainly Not Coming Back As It Was
- Thread starter MisterPenguin
- Start date
- Status
G00fyDad
Well-Known Member
No offense to Martin but I will believe it when I see it. There have been other people who say they've had inside information and have had pretty good track records on things claim that this was soon to come and nothing's shown up yet. I hope it shows up today, tomorrow, or even next week but I'm not holding my breath.
I'll just wait for Disney to prove me wrong.
I'll just wait for Disney to prove me wrong.
Think you are going to be wrong
G00fyDad
Well-Known Member
Think you are going to be wrong
One can only help. But I've been hoping for months.
SteveAZee
Premium Member
nickys
Premium Member
If you’re referring to either the DLP or the proposed system discussed on a recent podcast, Standby is standby. And free.
Once the physical line fills, a standby return pass is issued which is like a VQ to return and wait in the standby line. It’s still free.
The FP iin a paid option and the possible super-FP is a more expensive option.
But there is the limit of only being able to VQ 1 RIDE at a time from what I have read here and elsewhere.
nickys
Premium Member
Indeed. In the DLP system at least. But what does that have to do with standby being free, or not?
dovetail65
Well-Known Member
For me a standby system no matter the reason or intentions potentially raises the amount of walking two fold. That's just what I want to do dragging kids around or going with an elderly person. Walk all the way to the attraction, get a time, walk away, then walk all the way back.
The only thing standby system ie come back is good for is a couple or smaller younger parties(but not kids) that can move fast and are allowed to go on other rides in between the standby. For any larger groups, kids or elderly, forget it, just more walking just the same waiting, but waiting somewhere else.
The fix for me is what Disney can do best, just make the lines filled with things to see so the wait is as enticing as walking around the midway(which isn't enticing in the first place!). As a kid when I first went on Space Mountain I loved the line, some of the lines at Universal are fantastic and mom did the lines and never got on the attractions for a couple Harry Potter attractions, invest money in that. Do not try to get me to wait somewhere else, just make the wait as bearable as possible.
If line waits were truly on Disney's minds they would task Imagineers to think up at least one if not two HUGE attractions for each park that was designed for no other reason than to break all records for capacity per hour ,length of time for the attraction and things to see in the actual line. A triple whammy people eater, Like a moving theater that is 25 minutes long,etc.
Look at this list:
https://www.themeparktourist.com/features/20181111/36323/disneys-highest-capacity-attractions
I would hand this list to the colleges and have them compete and see what they come up with. I would use the 4885 PPH(People Per Hour) the Peoplemover moves as the target or larger, but make clear it has to be an attraction , not train type ride. Why not design something like ROTR that moves 5000K people an hour instead of 1800? Disney has money, makes money and with the current state of attendance that should be the goal. With the current line waits at the parks, the PPH should be the first criteria with experience second for any new attraction. Let's be honest even some newer attraction experience aren't E rides and at the same time have a poor PPH, they may as well of made a C ride that takes 8000 an hour off the other rides. ROTR is great, right, but for a 4 day WDW trip, a trip where the guests want to spend one day at each park, it is mathematically fact that 50% of those 4 day guests will never get on that ROTR. Knowing what Disney knows, the money they have, ROTR should have DOUBLE the capacity for an attraction debuting in 2021.
Well I am following the details. I may be a hold out too in thinking Disney is going to come out and say hey, we are sticking to 3 included FP for the 50th celebration and for the next two years while we celebrate as a give back to the guests(of course it is no give back but will seem like it). For me that would be a huge Disney plus, it is after all what made them different. I guess I am a 2% in that respect.
In regard to your comments it is in the details and I have read just about every post since this started, still I'm am not perfect writing my thoughts as I work or text, but I think you and I have a fundamental difference on what other views are on FP. I still believe , especially after going after covid in 2021, that a majority of people would take the old system over anything any other park has or anything we have talked about in this thread and by a 70% to 80% margin or more.
First, in my view from whatI have read there is a group of people that complaint is that FP in itself in any form is what causes the long lines, so I disagree with you there. This segment wants FP gone paid or not, it is all over the net and in this thread..
Then there is another group that will tolerate FP, but they just do not like that reservation could be made so far out or should be for Disney hotels only. Then there are the people that think FP is okay if it's paid, but they are actually in the first group and don't know it because in their minds a paid FP will somehow also shorten the standby lines because less people will use FP somehow freeing up time, but it can not happen that way. The line times are ultimately related to how many people are in the park. Once we hit that certain number(one we hit just about every day) no matter what scheme we use to move people around the line times in general can not be shortened. The long lines are created by a capacity issue that can never be overcome once a certain amount of people in the park, that can't change.
And I disagree with your statement that FP may dominate a portion of capacity. I just dont know how else to explain it until a light bulb goes off in someones head(as it did mine). I realized when the parks hit a certain number of people and everyone has the same claim to the same amount of Free FP it effects everyone the same way, from FP lines to standby lines, so it's crippling nothing. What you are saying only rings true if someone was not to us FP and everyone else did. The rub is that first group I mentioned does not want to use FP and feels it forces them to plan ahead and if they do not choose their FP then yes that small group would be effected.
I am not sure I am making sense, I would rather someone disagree than not understand my point and that is fine, but as my wife says, I am sure it makes sense to you honey as she giggles.
Last edited:
Jeff4272
Well-Known Member
So you mean it’s coming this week?Think you are going to be wrong
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
Because you keep ignoring the ways in which your proposal is different and worse than what we have now. Everyone has their own cutoff for what is an acceptable wait for a ride. If you're willing to wait 3 hours but not 4 hoursto wait 3 hours only to find out after your 3 hours is up that you have another hour to wait on a physical line, then you'll be upset that you actually waited 4 hours for the ride while being prevented from riding anything else.
Also, you assume that this system would allow you to get a Standby Pass up until the moment the parks close but nothing about any other virtual line system at WDW has ever done so. I've had FP+ return times that were less than an hour window because they were within the last hour of the park's posted closing time. I can assure you that a Standby Pass return window would function the same way. Once you accept that as a reality then it is clear that this isn't the same as what we have now.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
He didn't assume that -- I threw it out as a possibility and he was responding to me, although I later pointed out that Disney would almost certainly set up the system in a way that eliminated that possibility.
DisneyDodo
Well-Known Member
I can't. This is my last response because you literally ignore everything I write anyway. The total wait time is the same whether you do it in the physical queue or somewhere else. If Disney decided that everyone must wear a green hat while waiting in line (assuming the green hat was provided and comfortable), it would not make the lines longer or prevent you from riding what you want to ride. What would change is only that people in the line are wearing green hats. If Disney takes a subset of the people in line and moves them somewhere else temporarily, then returns them to the line in the exact same order, it will also not make the lines longer or prevent you from riding what you want to ride. What would change is only the temporary location of the people in the line.
For the 30th time, I'm not assuming anything about the system. In fact, I am 100% confident the system I'm describing is not the one Disney will announce. That's my whole point - I don't like the system they implemented in DLP and will likely bring to WDW.
Finally, SBP is nothing like FP+. The latter was meant as a supplement to standby and could be booked over 60 days in advance. SBP is meant to replace traditional standby (or at least part of it), and can only be reserved immediately at the time you wish to begin waiting for that ride. Disney defines "closing time" as when guests can no longer enter standby. Disney is fully prepared for the fact that they will not be able to physically lock the gates until well after that time - that's all baked in. Whether people are queuing in a physical line or virtually, the amount of time it would take for them to ride would be the same. The formula is very simple: time = number of riders / ride capacity. Of course Disney could cut off passes before park close, the same way they could decide right now that guests can only enter standby queues until 1 hour before official park closing. But there is no specific reason why they would be motivated to do the former if they aren't doing the latter. Just like there would be no reason to cut off the lines earlier just because guests are required to wear green hats.
flynnibus
Premium Member
No, this is again 'sounds close, but not what is being said at all'. People don't complain that FP is the source of long lines - crowds are the source of long lines. The point is FP --impacts standby lines--, and people have to articulate why because some people think 'The more FP the better...' because they are only thinking about as a successful consumer of FP. FP causes standby lines to get WORSE - not that FP caused long lines to start with.
Which is why people should be clear when talking about FP vs FP+. Scheduling of FP aka FP+ has its own consequences that can be evaluated independently of the idea of line-bypasses.
Yes lines are a function of attendance - but you can also evaluate two situations WITHOUT changing the crowd as part of the discussion... which is what people are talking about when they talk about a low volume line bypass being a LESS impact on standby than the current HIGH volume line bypass model. Just because you can say "well if the park is more crowded, lines will still get worse" -- that is tangential, not a factor in discussing the line bypass's impact on standby.
Sure it can be changed - which is exactly what Disney did as part of FP+... by adding FP+ to attractions that didn't have FP prior. It created incentives and marketing to steer demand to increase utilization, and hence relieve some demand elsewhere.
This is just one example of demand shaping that is possble - which ultimately impacts line. Yes, ultimately all systems will reach saturation and the only thing that can happen is lines increase -- but just because that ultimate ceiling exists, that doesn't mean its not worth working the system below that saturation point.
Your gross simplification ignores there is more than 'who used FP and who didn't'. There are the people that used FP as it was advertised... then you had people that optimized their FP usage... then you have people that flat out gamed the system as much as possible. There is a wide range in there... and when you consider the whole of the customer base, it's not really fair nor customer friendly to simplify it to "well, you should have learned how to game it too!" as most people here would defend with. They have no empathy for the customer who didn't goto the extreme to keep up with their own benefits.. which if you are instead the business who is trying to make as many happy customers as possible.. is not the attitude you want to take.
And on the 'plan ahead' angle thrown in at the end, it's not a matter of just 'who did and who didn't'. The system puts extra limits on you -- it's just some people choose to accept those things.. or even forget they have modified their behavior... where as others may not be as willing to happily forget their was other ways that don't have those same constraints. The common problem in that discussion is people unwilling to assess things outside their own POV. They instead retreat to 'well it works for me.. so must be you..' instead of objectively being able to see that maybe the person does have a point, even if it is one that doesn't impact you individually.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
You chaps need to put another layer on your tinfoil hats and tune them back in wednedsay…
Last edited:
1HAPPYGHOSTHOST
Well-Known Member
Once someone sees you are willing to pay for something, you will never again get it for free.
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
The difference between cutting off the physical line an hour before park close and cutting off a virtual Standby line an hour before park close is that the latter is much easier to do. So they may want to do it now but it is less practical. Standby Pass would make it very practical to do without angering as many guests since there is no physical line to turn people away from- and potentially save them in payroll costs, too, since they could limit how long a ride operates after closing. It might only be 30 minutes or so on average, but companies love to find ways to cut every payable minute they can for hourly employees.
I'm not saying g that you think you're proposal is what WILL happen - that's why I keep saying g that it's your proposal. I'm just pointing out a flaw in your proposal. If you don't think it would anger more people than it pleases then I'm not sure what else to tell you other than you're mistaken.
DisneyDodo
Well-Known Member
That's an interesting point, but if they want people to stop physically queuing an hour earlier, they don't actually have to turn them away - they can just choose an hour-earlier "closing" time. They specifically choose what to post as the closing time based on when they want people to stop getting in line (which they've presumably arrived at by working backwards from the time they want the park to actually be empty). For example, in recent years, MK has closed much earlier than in the past, which has the exact same effect (i.e. guests must stop getting in line earlier and fewer people ride overall), but without the PR hit you alluded to.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Dude...if he knows a date, but chose NOT to post the date and instead used a cryptic message... why on earth do you think if you just keep asking him, he'll suddenly post the info he intentionally chose not to post in the first place?
- Status