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

[JimboJones123]

My opinion is based on my experience as I have noted many times. Whereas other posters declare it a failure without having ever used it.

So where is the empirical evidence? I don't have it, do you? But yet you are happy to use convenient 'facts' as posted on this board by folks who do not like the system to support your beliefs.

And it may work nice for the what, 35% of guests any given day that are resort guests.

We'll find out this week what happens when the other 65% (I am just making these numbers up, I have no clue how many guests at each park daily stay on site) of guests have access to the program and it make for a complete train wreck.

 

[GoofGoof]

Ahhhhhh my dear friend, Judge Flynni. My contention is where is the "some where else"? Is it POTC? HM? Also IMO there are more bodies using FP then ever before. Where FP seemed to be more spaced out what I think we are seeing is that thru out the day during peak times you have peak usage. Why else would FP be out for the major attractions so early in the day. I mean there has to be some issue we are not seeing. Are these anecdotes not true? Mathematically I suppose the program looked great on paper.

I think some of the anecdotes may be a bit slanted. I read a lot of things from people who claimed the standby lines were much longer now and I was concerned for my trip in November. It didn't materialize in reality. I know I was there in a very low crowd time, but I've been there at the same time before and the standby lines seemed virtually the same to me. I have been to MK during busier times before FP+ when HM and Pirates both had a 30 min+ waits so those rides were never "always a walk on". There is no way to really know what the impact is of FP+ on standby lines unless you compare 2 days with the exact same crowd level and you will need to wait until regular FP is completely phased out. Anecdotal evidence (by either side) during testing with regular FP still available is inaccurate at best and subject to personal bias.

 

[JimboJones123]

Can we stop arguing and return this thread to some worthwhile discussion.

A differing view does not make a troll. Please respect other's views.

They have to have a differing point of view and live under a bridge.

 

[JimboJones123]

I think some of the anecdotes may be a bit slanted. I read a lot of things from people who claimed the standby lines were much longer now and I was concerned for my trip in November. It didn't materialize in reality. I know I was there in a very low crowd time, but I've been there at the same time before and the standby lines seemed virtually the same to me. I have been to MK during busier times before FP+ when HM and Pirates both had a 30 min+ waits so those rides were never "always a walk on". There is no way to really know what the impact is of FP+ on standby lines unless you compare 2 days with the exact same crowd level and you will need to wait until regular FP is completely phased out. Anecdotal evidence (by either side) during testing with regular FP still available is inaccurate at best and subject to personal bias.

In reality, it did give 3 bonus fast passes to resort guests. How many of them would have even used fast pass before? Now they are adding new waits because they skip the waits that they would have never skipped under the old system. So..... longer waits.

Disney will never openks for us to see the increase in average number of fast passes for those guests, but they did go up. Significantly. That has to be accounted for somewhere. Thus longer stand by lines.

 

[ford91exploder]

It bears repeating... it's mathematically impossible for every line to be longer concurrently with the same attraction capacity unless there are more people.

FP would create longer standby lines by creating different priority queues - it shifted people and used different priorities. But it's a shell game in terms of moving the impact. It doesn't happen everywhere simultaneously.

You need more bodies physically taking up a slot to have any wait extended... and the same body can't be in multiple places at the same time.

If you are seeing new waits somewhere.. that means somewhere else there isn't.

OR it now takes longer to accept each guest on the ride - thereby decreasing system capacity, Ride capacity is a constant fixed at design. However cycle (FP processing + Attraction load time) time has increased which will lengthen lines because it now takes 5-10 seconds at each scan station where with physical tickets it took under a second at each station.

It's interesting how fast the queue drained at PeterPan WITHOUT FP usage during EMH as noted by a previous poster. There cycle time was constrained only by ride capacity + load time.

 

[GoofGoof]

In reality, it did give 3 bonus fast passes to resort guests. How many of them would have even used fast pass before? Now they are adding new waits because they skip the waits that they would have never skipped under the old system. So..... longer waits.

Disney will never openks for us to see the increase in average number of fast passes for those guests, but they did go up. Significantly. That has to be accounted for somewhere. Thus longer stand by lines.

But if these guests never would have used FP before then they would have been in the standby line. All these FP "virgins" are no longer in standby lines thus reducing them. The other thing I personally experienced was not every FP reservation will be used. Even if someone books 3 per day they are not guaranteed to use all 3. We probably skipped 5 or 6 of our reservations in a week.

During current testing they allowed double dipping. The FP commandos loved this. Book 3 reservations and use the backup cards to pull even more FP. When this is phased out there will be either more FP+ capacity available for rides or more standby capacity. If Disney decides to increase the total FP distributed under the new system then it will result in less standby capacity, basic math. There is no official indication that the FP capacity will be any different.

 

[John]

In reality, it did give 3 bonus fast passes to resort guests. How many of them would have even used fast pass before? Now they are adding new waits because they skip the waits that they would have never skipped under the old system. So..... longer waits.

Disney will never openks for us to see the increase in average number of fast passes for those guests, but they did go up. Significantly. That has to be accounted for somewhere. Thus longer stand by lines.

My point exactly....then add in to that what attractions these FP's were used on. I think a fair guess would be on the most popular. I agree that it will even out eventually. But what does that mean? I don't think the demand for those popular attractions will diminish. Also MATHMATICALLY it seems when each phase is opened up to more and more guest the issues will just be multiplied with the number of guest and demand.

Anecdotally or not, slanted or not the way we have toured the parks have been drastically changed. The one thing I disagree with PO4 ( with all due respect) is that it isn't different. That the parks are the same. Well technically he is correct. But theoretically anytime the experience changes the parks change.

For those of you who have not had major issues, I think for everyone of you there are multibles that have had an issue. I also think it is a very personal opinion as to how big or small those issues have to be to adversely affect their visit. I also will further contend that it has been an extremely small number of people who say they love it.....the experience is so much better then before.

At this point does it even matter? I have said it before we cant judge what the general perception is among regular guest from sites like this, but with a program and product so much based on service is this program so far behind it has little chance of ever winning the war of positive vs negative perception? Was, did TDWC figure this in to their decision making? Another words....was the program DOA?

 

[John]

OR it now takes longer to accept each guest on the ride - thereby decreasing system capacity, Ride capacity is a constant fixed at design. However cycle (FP processing + Attraction load time) time has increased which will lengthen lines because it now takes 5-10 seconds at each scan station where with physical tickets it took under a second at each station.

It's interesting how fast the queue drained at PeterPan WITHOUT FP usage during EMH as noted by a previous poster. There cycle time was constrained only by ride capacity + load time.

Just another element in to the entire equation.

 

[John]

But if these guests never would have used FP before then they would have been in the standby line. All these FP "virgins" are no longer in standby lines thus reducing them. The other thing I personally experienced was not every FP reservation will be used. Even if someone books 3 per day they are not guaranteed to use all 3. We probably skipped 5 or 6 of our reservations in a week.

During current testing they allowed double dipping. The FP commandos loved this. Book 3 reservations and use the backup cards to pull even more FP. When this is phased out there will be either more FP+ capacity available for rides or more standby capacity. If Disney decides to increase the total FP distributed under the new system then it will result in less standby capacity, basic math. There is no official indication that the FP capacity will be any different.

I do agree with the second part of your analogy. But in the first part you assume that the guest would not only be in the Standby line but also assume they would be at that attraction to begin with. There lies the fault. Those guest might be somewhere else....at another attraction. Now they have an "appointment" that must be kept.

Again as far as the second part is concerned I think what you are missing in the total sum is that as the system is rolled out it will be opened to more guest hence more FP demand. If as like you said " There is no official indication that FP will be any different" everything will remain the same except for FP demand. Now does that make the FP line longer? or does it make the standby line longer?

 

[GoofGoof]

I do agree with the second part of your analogy. But in the first part you assume that the guest would not only be in the Standby line but also assume they would be at that attraction to begin with. There lies the fault. Those guest might be somewhere else....at another attraction. Now they have an "appointment" that must be kept.

Again as far as the second part is concerned I think what you are missing in the total sum is that as the system is rolled out it will be opened to more guest hence more FP demand. If as like you said " There is no official indication that FP will be any different" everything will remain the same except for FP demand. Now does that make the FP line longer? or does it make the standby line longer?

Here's an example of what I'm saying. If at TSMM 85% of the ride capacity was used for FP regular and 15% was used for standby and they roll out the new system and keep it 85/15 then 15% of the capacity will still be used by standby riders. With no decrease in capacity the only way the Standby line is longer is if more people attempt to ride standby. This could end up being the case. Under the current system there are definitely people who ride TSMM more than once in a day using FP. Will those people still take multiple rides by waiting standby or will they just ride once if they have a FP reservation? On the flip side more unique guests will ride using FP since you can't repeat. If you assume these guests only ride once then that decreases the number of people riding standby. If they adjust the 85/15 split and make it 95/5 or something like that it will negatively impact standby lines.

 

[John]

As I take breaks from my Christmas baking and thinking about this entire ( IMO) mess. I think what could have been? Disney could have achieved everything they wanted and left the ORIGINAL FP as it was. Allow people to come back when they wanted to, Keep the bands and the ability to keep track of guest. You could still find the way to up charge as UNI does by offering an unlimited FOL pass ie unlimited FP and everyone is happy and TWDC has a PR success. How many of us would pay $99.99 for this privilege over the course of your visit? Or $39.95 a day?
How hard would it be, how much money would it take to just better educate guest on the legacy system? GR would not be strained to the breaking point etc. etc.

 

[John]

Here's an example of what I'm saying. If at TSMM 85% of the ride capacity was used for FP regular and 15% was used for standby and they roll out the new system and keep it 85/15 then 15% of the capacity will still be used by standby riders. With no decrease in capacity the only way the Standby line is longer is if more people attempt to ride standby. This could end up being the case. Under the current system there are definitely people who ride TSMM more than once in a day using FP. Will those people still take multiple rides by waiting standby or will they just ride once if they have a FP reservation? On the flip side more unique guests will ride using FP since you can't repeat. If you assume these guests only ride once then that decreases the number of people riding standby. If they adjust the 85/15 split and make it 95/5 or something like that it will negatively impact standby lines.

I wont disagree with this. I think what also happens is more people will be shut out to begin with....therefore if they want to ride that attraction they will have to wait standby. No matter what the percentage of ride capacity is. the difference is how many people are getting those limited FP and WHEN they get them. As PO4 has said when you reserve those FPs you now are waiting in a virtual line 60 days out. It is quite possible ( we don't know) that most FPs will be distributed 60 days out. You log on day 59 and you get Pan or POTC. There is no way that standby lines will not be longer....for most rides. For rides that didn't need FP and now do, will hold the standby line up so FP can load. Again there will be many more people reserving FP to begin with.

 

[John]

Ok @ParentsOf4 you have "liked" a lot of my post I am waiting for your next installment.....lol

 

[GoofGoof]

I think what also happens is more people will be shut out to begin with....therefore if they want to ride that attraction they will have to wait standby.

I know that the general perception is more people will be shut out from reserving than under the current system, but what I'm saying is if FP capacity is the same then that can't possibly be the case. Here's some hypothetical numbers: TSMM has a FP capacity of 1,000 FPs per hour and the park is open 12 hours so 12,000 FPs per day. Under the old system lets assume 2,000 of those FPs were consumed by "commandos" who were using a 2nd or 3rd FP for the day for that ride. That means under the old system 10,000 unique guests used FP on the day. Under the new system there will be 12,000 unique guests using FP for that ride. Even if there were no repeat users under the old system the number of FP users would be the same, not less.

Where I think the rub comes in on these boards is who those 12,000 guests are going to be. Under the old system the most informed, veteran guests knew which ride to pull FP for and which didn't need it. This system will level the playing field allowing guests who may not have known to get to TSMM before noon a shot at FP for the ride. If you don't stay on property you will also now be likely shut out from FP for popular rides.

 

[wm49rs]

Fast pass capacity may be the same, but room capacity has increased, and continues to do so. Both on-site and off. And the number of rides/attractions has simply not kept pace....

 

[ParentsOf4]

Ok @ParentsOf4 you have "liked" a lot of my post I am waiting for your next installment.....lol

In general, there has been a reasonably mature discussion on the most recent FP+ developments along with the corresponding pros and cons of MyMagic+.

I always like that.

I prefer to evaluate MyMagic+ based on how I think it will affect the guest experience in total. Therefore, I think it's helpful when we concentrate less on individual experiences and instead try to understand MyMagic+ at the macro level.

I realize some will like MyMagic+ and others won't.

I am disappointed that it appears that after decades of relative in-park equality, Disney has decided to relegate offsite guests to second-class status, especially considering the tremendous number of onsite guests WDW is trying to accommodate. Let's face it, if WDW had only 5,000 onsite rooms, then there still would be plenty of ride capacity left for offsite guests. WDW's rooms vs. rides numbers are just so wrong for this.

If the FP+ policy being tested at DAK is extended to other parks, then how does any offsite guest ever like MyMagic+?

Realizing how many offsite guests might be adversely impacted by MyMagic+, it's difficult for me to envision any scenario where WDW as a whole is "better" as a result of MyMagic+.

I think everyone would have been happier if the money had been spent on Cars Land at DHS!

 

[GoofGoof]

In general, there has been a reasonably mature discussion on the most recent FP+ developments along with the corresponding pros and cons of MyMagic+.

I always like that.

I prefer to evaluate MyMagic+ based on how I think it will affect the guest experience in total. Therefore, I think it's helpful when we concentrate less on individual experiences and instead try to understand MyMagic+ at the macro level.

I realize some will like MyMagic+ and others won't.

I am disappointed that it appears that after decades of relative in-park equality, Disney has decided to relegate offsite guests to second-class status, especially considering the tremendous number of onsite guests WDW is trying to accommodate. Let's face it, if WDW had only 5,000 onsite rooms, then there still would be plenty of ride capacity left for offsite guests. WDW's rooms vs. rides numbers are just so wrong for this.

If the FP+ policy being tested at DAK is extended to other parks, then how does any offsite guest ever like MyMagic+?

Realizing how many offsite guests might be adversely impacted by MyMagic+, it's difficult for me to envision any scenario where WDW as a whole is "better" as a result of MyMagic+.

I think everyone would have been happier if the money had been spent on Cars Land at DHS!

Not to totally change gears, but if Universal really pursues their plans to significantly increase hotel rooms I wonder when/if the unlimited front of the line pass will start to negatively impact other guest's experiences.

 

[wm49rs]

Not to totally change gears, but if Universal really pursues their plans to significantly increase hotel rooms I wonder when/if the unlimited front of the line pass will start to negatively impact other guest's experiences.

The difference being Universal is expanding their offerings to meet the demand....

 

[ParentsOf4]

Fast pass capacity may be the same, but room capacity has increased, and continues to do so. Both on-site and off. And the number of rides/attractions has simply not kept pace....

Some numbers for you:

1971 - Magic Kingdom opens; Total WDW rooms: 1,911
1982 - Epcot opens; Total WDW rooms: 2,497
1989 - DHS opens; Total WDW rooms: 5,476
1998 - DAK opens: Total WDW rooms: 20,156 (including Swan, Dolphin, & Shades of Green)
2013 - Nothing opens; Total WDW rooms: 30,978 (including Swan, Dolphin, & Shades of Green)

As I've written before, the dirty little secret is that WDW is no longer in the theme park business; it's in the hotel and timeshare business.

Once you realize this, corporate Disney's behavior becomes clear.

 

[englanddg]

Not to totally change gears, but if Universal really pursues their plans to significantly increase hotel rooms I wonder when/if the unlimited front of the line pass will start to negatively impact other guest's experiences.

Also, the unlimited benefit at Uni is limited to their deluxe resorts.

They do now have a fourth hotel opening soon called Cabana Bay (their version of a value resort), but you don't get the benefit if you stay there.