FastPass+ open to all guests including offsite beginning next week at Disney's Animal Kingdom

[George]

Without getting too deep into this argument, I want to point out that the FP+ and Legacy Fastpass inventory are the same, and have been for quite some time. Meaning that if, For example, Everest had 2000 Legacy Fastpasses to distribute in a day, it now has 2000 FP+ in a day. Obviously those aren't real numbers but you get the point.

Yep. One thing I noted in October talking to people was that fp+ has many people using fastpass who didn't use it before. For someone like me who used to get 5-10 fastpasses per day, I get less.

 

[Cesar R M]

Yep. One thing I noted in October talking to people was that fp+ has many people using fastpass who didn't use it before. For someone like me who used to get 5-10 fastpasses per day, I get less.

to resume, a detriment for those who knows and forcing it to people who dont know.

 

[wdwmagic]

Right, but there are designated Fastpass locations in the parks already. If we see 30+ minute waits for the kiosks during the holidays, a solution is to put Fastpass+ kiosk banks in previous Fastpass distribution locations. Putting all this on a smart phone will ease the congestion at these kiosks, but limiting it to the kiosks during the test sounds ill conceived. I almost wonder if some of the people in ops are deliberately sabotaging tests like this because they know Fastpass+ is a horrible idea.
What's more likely is that there will be CMs with iPads near this kiosks to give additional support to people.

The CMs with iPads is happening.

 

[CDavid]

The CMs with iPads is happening.

I really, sincerely hope they have a small army of CM's with iPads available, because this plan potentially has unmitigated disaster written all over it.

 

[TP2000]

The argument that FP+ doesn't work as an onsite perk can be based on even simpler numbers:

- Universal: 2 theme parks, 2,400 onsite rooms
- Disneyland: 2 theme parks, 2,500 onsite rooms
- WDW: 4 theme parks, 28,000 onsite rooms

Brilliant point, thank you! The lack of rides at WDW, paired with the over-abundance of onsite hotel rooms, should have been a flashing warning sign for the execs who decided to implement FastPass+.

But again, it's more proof that the people shoving FastPass+ into WDW's parks have no real experience with visiting these parks as customers or working in these parks as employees.

And adding FastPass to the Teacups isn't the solution that works anywhere beyond a Powerpoint show in Burbank.

 

[surfsupdon]

I've thought this same thing myself. I got so close as to have had all the paperwork sent to me ready for signatures about 6 years ago, and for some reason I just couldn't bring myself to do it. Countless times over the last few years I've counted my lucky stars I didn't sign those papers... Between their rules and policy changes for owners, to devaluing your ability to sell if need be, to THE YETI, and mostly MM+.

So glad I've kept that $140,000 (over the length of the contract) in my pocket and not put it in TDO's. So glad.

My dad always said, "You don't know if Disney is going to be as good later on, or if we will still want to go." He was right. Back in the mid 90s, we had a surge of growth--MGM additions and (Wild) Animal Kingdom, Blizzard Beach, numerous new rides, and awesome new hotels, mini golf, and DtD expansions.

Disney isn't in that growth spurt any longer. And the way you vacation at Disney has now dramatically changed. So glad we did not buy that DVC at BoardWalk.

Still like Disney, will be back, but not yet.

 

[TP2000]

My dad always said, "You don't know if Disney is going to be as good later on, or if we will still want to go." He was right.

Your dad was very smart.

I've occasionally looked at timeshares in a few resort locations since the late 1980's. And every time, I just can't commit to entering into a contract that commits me to a specific company for decades to come. Even if that company is "Disney".

The track record of WDW theme park expansion and operation from 2005 to 2015 has reminded me of why I didn't sign up for DVC the time I sat through their perky-perky-perky sales pitch a decade ago.

Did I mention how perky the DVC salespeople were? PERKY! But I still didn't sign. "Welcome Home!"

 

[Tom Morrow]

The CMs with iPads is happening.

They are already out in the parks, expect to see more and more of them.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

My dad always said, "You don't know if Disney is going to be as good later on, or if we will still want to go." He was right. Back in the mid 90s, we had a surge of growth--MGM additions and (Wild) Animal Kingdom, Blizzard Beach, numerous new rides, and awesome new hotels, mini golf, and DtD expansions.

Disney isn't in that growth spurt any longer. And the way you vacation at Disney has now dramatically changed. So glad we did not buy that DVC at BoardWalk.

Still like Disney, will be back, but not yet.

We're DVC members and we use our points for Hilton Head Island, Aulani, Disneyland, and WDW. There's also a resort in Vero Beach, but we haven't been there yet. Not like you would have been stuck going to WDW all the time.

 

[71jason]

Just to expand on this, one does not need the app to gain mobile access. For those on Windows Phone, unsupported Android or iOS devices, etc. the Walt Disney World website is still available.

This presumes the wifi is able to handle near-capacity crowds. My experiences around July 4th suggest it was not as of this Summer.

 

[wdwmagic]

This presumes the wifi is able to handle near-capacity crowds. My experiences around July 4th suggest it was not as of this Summer.

Yes indeed. Data capacity on both wifi and cell is severely constrained at busy times. I see this as a big issue for MM+.

 

[ParentsOf4]

Not allowing FP+ reservations ahead of time must be either true testing or a transitional part of the phased rollout. A documented purpose of MM+ is to get guests to reserve things ahead of time, so that Disney gets more of their wallet. This is only effective if you can actually reserve things ahead of time.

You make a lot of sense. Conceptually, I agree with you 100%.

The problem is that WDW doesn't have sufficient ride capacity to keep everyone happy. They have way too many rooms and too few attractions. They certainly don't have enough to guarantee 3 good FP+ selections for onsite guests at 2 of their parks. Forget about offsite guests.

It's why Disney has played games and added FP+ to rides and shows that really don't need it. It's why many of those who have used FP+ selections for shows have reported that they were a waste. These steps clearly demonstrate that WDW sorely lacks attractions worth Fast Passing.

When you don't have enough resources to keep all your customers happy, you either add resources (always expensive) or reallocate resources. Disney has chosen to reallocate resources.

Like many companies, Disney has decided to focus on its most profitable customers. In WDW's case, this means concentrating on onsite guests.

WDW's hotels are incredibly, and in some cases, obscenely profitable. A Theme Park View room this Christmas is over $1000/night at the Grand Floridian. Mind you, this is just a room. Not concierge, not a suite, not located in a major metropolitan area. Even rooms at some "Value Resorts" are $200/night this Christmas. It's difficult to emphasize enough just how profitable these rooms are.

Corporate Disney wants these rooms filled. With WDW's occupancy rate down to 80% (excellent for many hotels but well below WDW's historical average), Disney is leaving hundreds of millions of dollars of "free money" on the table every year. ("Free money" because these rooms are just sitting there, available but unoccupied.) Heck, if they can get these rooms filled, they can build even more hotels and DVC.

If Disney makes FP+ equally available to all guests, then that doesn't help fill rooms. Empty rooms means hundreds of millions walking out the door.

In order for MM+ to succeed, guests have to perceive MM+ as being worth WDW's resort prices. The more Disney can differentiate between onsite and offsite guest experiences, the more likely we are to pay their prices.

However, Disney also has to be careful not to drive away offsite business. It's a balancing act where the correct answer (i.e. the one that's the most profitable) is unclear and might require some trial-and-error to discover.

The beauty of FP+ is its flexibility. With the infrastructure in place, Disney can change the rules with software. Disney can experiment repeatedly until it finds the "magical" combination, where "magical" is defined as largest profits for corporate Disney.

If the current onsite/offsite differentiation doesn't work, Disney can change it. The advantage of remaining in "test" phase is Disney can try combinations and gauge the public's reaction. If a combination is poorly received, Disney can discard it and, if questioned, just say it was a test.

I think Disney is smart to try exactly what the are doing and smart to first try it at DAK. However, I'm not convinced about the timing. I think they should wait 2 weeks until after New Year's Eve.

If I'm managing this, I'm doing exactly what Disney is doing. I'm starting by making onsite MM+ look as good as possible, which means offering as little as possible for the DAK offsite guest FP+ "test". Tell offsite guests they have to use the FP+ kiosks after they arrive. If I can manage to get away with that without driving away offsite guests, then I'm golden. If it's a disaster, I simply say it was a "test".

Can anyone say "trial balloon?"

 

[JerseyDad]

....we never really 'bought into" the whole FP system. In 10 yrs and 11 visits ...maybe ...we used FP ...5 times. I never saw a need to plan ahead that much ..and at the same time ...not know if when my FP time came up ...I'd be doing something else that was more entertaining? That happened a lot this past trip and we blew off many of the FP+ reservations.

...it's of course gotten noticeably 'more crowded" at WDW in the past 10 yrs ...with room / resort additions ...and a lack of park attraction expansion. But ...we made due for the most part this last trip. My 'issues' were more along the lines of 'operations' of both the parks and the resort ...

....and yes ...you couldn't swing a stuffed Tigger without clobbering a DVC representative.

 

[doctornick]

That's what I say. Let everyone come in and make reservations on their mobile device and do it like traditional FP. It would give the convenience of not having to run to get FPs but levels the playing field and gets rid of issues such as only allowing 3 per day.

I am totally behind the idea, but think that if you allow resort guests 3 per day ahead of time, you would wipe out a significant amount of capacity before the day of. I think it would make more sense to make it 2 per day that can be booked ahead of time (or even only 1) -- with maybe limiting that to resort guests and APs.

 

[GoofGoof]

I am totally behind the idea, but think that if you allow resort guests 3 per day ahead of time, you would wipe out a significant amount of capacity before the day of. I think it would make more sense to make it 2 per day that can be booked ahead of time (or even only 1) -- with maybe limiting that to resort guests and APs.

Problem with that is people are already not happy with 3, saying that isn't enough. If you want to use this as a perk for onsite guests to get them to book rooms you have to offer something with more perceived value not less. With the tiered system in place at EPCOT and DHS already I could actually see them going to a system where deluxe guests can book 2 or even all 3 of their FP reservations from tier 1 while other guests can only book 1. Now if someone is deciding between Poly and Coronado Springs they get another "perk" to push them to the more expensive rooms. It probably works logistically since there are fewer deluxe rooms than value or Moderate so it wouldn't completely drain FP for the most popular rides.

 

[Clamman73]

You make a lot of sense. Conceptually, I agree with you 100%.

The problem is that WDW doesn't have sufficient ride capacity to keep everyone happy. They have way too many rooms and too few attractions. They certainly don't have enough to guarantee 3 good FP+ selections for onsite guests at 2 of their parks. Forget about offsite guests.

It's why Disney has played games and added FP+ to rides and shows that really don't need it. It's why many of those who have used FP+ selections for shows have reported that they were a waste. These steps clearly demonstrate that WDW sorely lacks attractions worth Fast Passing.

When you don't have enough resources to keep all your customers happy, you either add resources (always expensive) or reallocate resources. Disney has chosen to reallocate resources.

Like many companies, Disney has decided to focus on its most profitable customers. In WDW's case, this means concentrating on onsite guests.

WDW's hotels are incredibly, and in some cases, obscenely profitable. A Theme Park View room this Christmas is over $1000/night at the Grand Floridian. Mind you, this is just a room. Not concierge, not a suite, not located in a major metropolitan area. Even rooms at some "Value Resorts" are $200/night this Christmas. It's difficult to emphasize enough just how profitable these rooms are.

Corporate Disney wants these rooms filled. With WDW's occupancy rate down to 80% (excellent for many hotels but well below WDW's historical average), Disney is leaving hundreds of millions of dollars of "free money" on the table every year. ("Free money" because these rooms are just sitting there, available but unoccupied.) Heck, if they can get these rooms filled, they can build even more hotels and DVC.

If Disney makes FP+ equally available to all guests, then that doesn't help fill rooms. Empty rooms means hundreds of millions walking out the door.

In order for MM+ to succeed, guests have to perceive MM+ as being worth WDW's resort prices. The more Disney can differentiate between onsite and offsite guest experiences, the more likely we are to pay their prices.

However, Disney also has to be careful not to drive away offsite business. It's a balancing act where the correct answer (i.e. the one that's the most profitable) is unclear and might require some trial-and-error to discover.

The beauty of FP+ is its flexibility. With the infrastructure in place, Disney can change the rules with software. Disney can experiment repeatedly until it finds the "magical" combination, where "magical" is defined as largest profits for corporate Disney.

If the current onsite/offsite differentiation doesn't work, Disney can change it. The advantage of remaining in "test" phase is Disney can try combinations and gauge the public's reaction. If a combination is poorly received, Disney can discard it and, if questioned, just say it was a test.

I think Disney is smart to try exactly what the are doing and smart to first try it at DAK. However, I'm not convinced about the timing. I think they should wait 2 weeks until after New Year's Eve.

If I'm managing this, I'm doing exactly what Disney is doing. I'm starting by making onsite MM+ look as good as possible, which means offering as little as possible for the DAK offsite guest FP+ "test". Tell offsite guests they have to use the FP+ kiosks after they arrive. If I can manage to get away with that without driving away offsite guests, then I'm golden. If it's a disaster, I simply say it was a "test".

Can anyone say "trial balloon?"

Hopefully the $1000/night GF room also includes a bottle of lube.

 

[doctornick]

Problem with that is people are already not happy with 3, saying that isn't enough. If you want to use this as a perk for onsite guests to get them to book rooms you have to offer something with more perceived value not less. With the tiered system in place at EPCOT and DHS already I could actually see them going to a system where deluxe guests can book 2 or even all 3 of their FP reservations from tier 1 while other guests can only book 1. Now if someone is deciding between Poly and Coronado Springs they get another "perk" to push them to the more expensive rooms. It probably works logistically since there are fewer deluxe rooms than value or Moderate so it wouldn't completely drain FP for the most popular rides.

Understood, but I am suggesting having 1-2 FP+ being able to be booked ahead of time by resort guests (and perhaps APs). And then having the remaining amount being available as "day off" only in a similar manner to how legacy FP is now distributed. That would -- theoretically -- enable people to get more than 3 a day.

 

[JerseyDad]

....since I was at WDW this Aug ...and didn't use all my FP+ appointments each day .....I wondered if that "impact" (similar to a no show at an ADR) ...could be mitigated by giving that non-used FP+ time back into the "pool" for distribution after a certain period of no-show time?

.....I'm sure that some industrial engineer has a 6 page long logarithm laden computation to figure / factor stuff like that ....but that's not my specialty..

 

[GoofGoof]

Understood, but I am suggesting having 1-2 FP+ being able to be booked ahead of time by resort guests (and perhaps APs). And then having the remaining amount being available as "day off" only in a similar manner to how legacy FP is now distributed. That would -- theoretically -- enable people to get more than 3 a day.

I hear you and that would create a less disruptive experience for a lot of guests more similar to the legacy system. It would be more fair, but I doubt Disney is looking to be fair in this case. The problem is they laid out the money to build this and are expecting a return. It's not likely they will tweak the system in any way that doesn't directly benefit those who are paying more. Remember that from the start chief executives at TWDC have described this project as a way to increase per person revenues. That can only be accomplished by either directly charging for the service (which is still a future possibility but not in the current plans) or by encouraging more people to stay on property by offering FP reservations as a perk.

The other main benefit that execs talk about is getting guests to plan ahead. They feel that if a guest plans their vacation days ahead (60 days?) then they are less likely to end up doing things off property. It will also help them some with staffing and cutting some costs. If the system allows for more day of reservations and less advanced reservations you lose those benefits.

The only shot anyone gets more than 3 FPs in a day is going to be as an add-on package (pay $9.99 extra to add an additional FP reservation) or if they decide to offer additional reservations as a perk to get people to stay on property. Something like a tiered system, 5 for deluxe, 4 for moderate and 3 for value. This may even end up being something more like free dining which is only offered seasonally. Book a complete vacation package now for stays from September through November and receive free dining. If you upgrade to a deluxe room for this stay receive 2 bonus FP reservations per day. Just an example, the possibilities are endless. IMHO no benefit will be given to anyone that doesn't come as the direct result of shelling out more cash.

 

[John]

I hear you and that would create a less disruptive experience for a lot of guests more similar to the legacy system. It would be more fair, but I doubt Disney is looking to be fair in this case. The problem is they laid out the money to build this and are expecting a return. It's not likely they will tweak the system in any way that doesn't directly benefit those who are paying more. Remember that from the start chief executives at TWDC have described this project as a way to increase per person revenues. That can only be accomplished by either directly charging for the service (which is still a future possibility but not in the current plans) or by encouraging more people to stay on property by offering FP reservations as a perk.

The other main benefit that execs talk about is getting guests to plan ahead. They feel that if a guest plans their vacation days ahead (60 days?) then they are less likely to end up doing things off property. It will also help them some with staffing and cutting some costs. If the system allows for more day of reservations and less advanced reservations you lose those benefits.

The only shot anyone gets more than 3 FPs in a day is going to be as an add-on package (pay $9.99 extra to add an additional FP reservation) or if they decide to offer additional reservations as a perk to get people to stay on property. Something like a tiered system, 5 for deluxe, 4 for moderate and 3 for value. This may even end up being something more like free dining which is only offered seasonally. Book a complete vacation package now for stays from September through November and receive free dining. If you upgrade to a deluxe room for this stay receive 2 bonus FP reservations per day. Just an example, the possibilities are endless. IMHO no benefit will be given to anyone that doesn't come as the direct result of shelling out more cash.

Here is the rub with this scenario, What FP+ will I get for that $9.99? How long will it take for guest to realize the program is a sham? Gaging this program here among the blue pages is not representative of the average guest. Even someone who might somewhat understand the system at home when they book might not know which attractions need a FP or not. So they get to the park and after a day or two..."get with the program" Just to find out they are locked out of top attractions. PO4 is right, Disney is taking a huge risk. I agree this whole program is to drive room occupancy...but as a service provider you only get one chance with most customers (guest). The first impression is the most lasting impression. They have already decided that some of us veterans will be casualties and feel that they can just fill our spot with someone else. But is this a solid long range business model that will be successful? Do they honestly think they can fill these rooms to offset the potential loss in revenue by unhappy guest? Did TWDC think this was a "slam dunk"? Lastly are we (Me) to stupid to see the potential? Are we missing something here?