News FPs cancelled when Hotel room cancelled

[Ariel1986]

But the issue here is having to stand for two hours, looking at the back of somebody's head, doing nothing while other people ride a ride, just so that you can ride something for three minutes. That's actually kind of insanity. And to top it off, you paid $100 to do this.

This is the reality of theme parks though- any park. As others have said, Universal, Six Flags- it's the same. You either choose to wait (or get there for rope drop) or you pay to skip the line. At least Disney offers the chance to skip the line for free. Yes the chances may be limited and it takes a little work sometimes to score a FP+ but what more can they do? Someone is going to lose out whatever the system is, there is literally no possible way to make it so that no one ever has to queue.

Building more capacity isn't the issue- the latest, best new ride is always going to have a crazy queue whatever park you're in. I waited 2 hours for the newest roller coaster at Six Flags Magic Mountain a couple years ago because I didn't want to pay for their express pass option. Again as others have stated, FoP is pretty much the only ride right now with really insane waits.

 

[disneyflush]

As it is, "Disney closing old attractions" is a red herring. Disney has opened new attractions at a rate in excess of closing old attractions.

This is wrong. Can you list how this would be true in Epcot, for example?

Beyond that, they've done a far better job with new attractions with regard to how many guests each serves, and with regard to the quality of the experience in queue.

Most of the original people eaters were built when attendance was 20% of what it is now and they still have ~30% more capacity per hour than many of the newer rides.

Queue experience is subjective but they have done a great job with most of the newer queues. I agree with this opinion.

These facts nullify any contention about the closing of old attractions as much as such contentions are nullified by guest behavior, attendance stats, and revenues in the face of what's offered.

Your opinions aren't facts. If I'm the first person to tell you that I apologize for being harsh.

 

[peter11435]

This is wrong. Can you list how this would be true in Epcot, for example?



Most of the original people eaters were built when attendance was 20% of what it is now and they still have ~30% more capacity per hour than many of the newer rides.
View attachment 359550

Queue experience is subjective but they have done a great job with most of the newer queues. I agree with this opinion.



Your opinions aren't facts. If I'm the first person to tell you that I apologize for being harsh.

I wouldn’t use those attraction capacity numbers. They are pretty much entirely wrong.

 

[Kman101]

I wouldn’t use those attraction capacity numbers. They are pretty much entirely wrong.

So do you think they've done a good job with new rides, taking capacity into consideration?

 

[peter11435]

So do you think they've done a good job with new rides, taking capacity into consideration?

It varies. But generally, no.

However the parks have always had a mix of people eaters and low capacity attractions. That mix continues with new projects. But many of the newer attractions are under built for their expected demand.

 

[MisterPenguin]

It varies. But generally, no.

However the parks have always had a mix of people eaters and low capacity attractions. That mix continues with new projects. But many of the newer attractions are under built for their expected demand.

It's time to build attractions with IP that people don't really like that much!

 

[RSoxNo1]

It's time to build attractions with IP that people don't really like that much!

Or you know, attractions not tied to movies.

 

[Kman101]

Or you know, attractions not tied to movies.

They seem to want the demand ... yet at the same time not want the demand ...

 

[bUU]

This is wrong.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Given how you immediately moved the goalposts (from "Disney" to "Epcot"), I doubt you would grant anything I or anyone else posted.

Your opinions aren't facts.

I can live with that. Your facts aren't facts.

However the parks have always had a mix of people eaters and low capacity attractions. That mix continues with new projects. But many of the newer attractions are under built for their expected demand.

That's normal and to be expected. You don't build for opening day, because that'll soon leave you with an under-performing facility. You build for the capacity you expect during the bulk of the life of the facility. Anyone who is judging capacity based on crowding the first year or two doesn't understand reasonable prudence.

They seem to want the demand ... yet at the same time not want the demand ...

What they want is to spend their dollars the very best way that those dollars can be spent. Every company wants the same thing. It frustrates some of their customers, who think that business is all about serving them, of course. Yes, things look so strange when they're analyzed only from one side. "Why are they doing that?" When you ignore the other half of the reality, nothing will ever make sense.

 

[Trackmaster]

This is the reality of theme parks though- any park. As others have said, Universal, Six Flags- it's the same. You either choose to wait (or get there for rope drop) or you pay to skip the line. At least Disney offers the chance to skip the line for free. Yes the chances may be limited and it takes a little work sometimes to score a FP+ but what more can they do? Someone is going to lose out whatever the system is, there is literally no possible way to make it so that no one ever has to queue.

Building more capacity isn't the issue- the latest, best new ride is always going to have a crazy queue whatever park you're in. I waited 2 hours for the newest roller coaster at Six Flags Magic Mountain a couple years ago because I didn't want to pay for their express pass option. Again as others have stated, FoP is pretty much the only ride right now with really insane waits.

I completely agree with you. That's way Disney the bomb (sorry, I'm bringing back some 90's slang, if you don't remember "da bomb" equals good). The FP+ is a true virtual queuing system. You are guaranteed three rides with no wait, can get a few more, and are welcome to do stand-by if you really want. In between, you're welcome to enjoy the shows, see the sights, get some food, or do something else. Without a reservation system, you have to stare at the back of somebody's head for two hours.

But I've actually come around to the priority pass system (pay to play system). Some people either can barely afford to go to a park, and/or do not care about production as much. Some people have the means, and/or go crazy if their production is low. So it makes sense to let people buy an upgraded park experience that suits their needs more.

 

[RSoxNo1]

They seem to want the demand ... yet at the same time not want the demand ...

This is a year one marketing push, that's it.

 

[unmitigated disaster]

To get back to what was said some pages ago, planning ahead is necessary in places in Europe. Want to skip a two hour wait to get into the Vatican Museums? Buy a ticket for a specific date and time online. It's the same with the Accademia in Florence. Heck, here in Tucson if you want to tour the Boneyard you must book at least 10 days in advance for security reasons.

Booking fastpasses fits right in.

 

[RollerCoaster]

After reading all 19 pages of this discussion I've learned that there are a whole lot of you that go to great lengths to be dishonest, scam the system, and take advantage of every imaginable loophole at the expense of others.

Disney should do away with FastPass + for this very reason. The old paper ticket system where you obtained your FP in the park at time of visit was much more equitable for all. It was easier and didn't make vacation planning a nightmare.

However they won't admit failure and do away with it so they should make a couple of changes to make it more equitable for ALL hotel guests.

1. All FastPass reservations should be cancelled immediately upon canceling or changing your booking. If you change your plans within 60 days then your FastPass reservations need to be recreated. That creates incentive not to change your plans, but also puts you on the same playing field as someone who books a trip less 60 days out! That's fair.

2. No one should be allowed to book FastPasses for any operating day more than 60 days out from that date. If you stay a week then you should need to login daily to create your FastPasses for each day. The 60-day reservation window should be the same for all on property guests. The current system is unfair since it allows people with longer stays to book FastPasses for park days more than 60 days out and puts people with shorter stays at a huge disadvantage.

3. If you no show for your hotel stay or cancel mid-stay. All FP reservations for the stay period made more than 30 days in advance should be cancelled immediately. You loose the benefit.

These three simple changes would make the entire system more equitable for all hotel guests and even park guests who suffer from all you scammers!

 

[nickys]

After reading all 19 pages of this discussion I've learned that there are a whole lot of you that go to great lengths to be dishonest, scam the system, and take advantage of every imaginable loophole at the expense of others.

Disney should do away with FastPass + for this very reason. The old paper ticket system where you obtained your FP in the park at time of visit was much more equitable for all. It was easier and didn't make vacation planning a nightmare.

However they won't admit failure and do away with it so they should make a couple of changes to make it more equitable for ALL hotel guests.

1. All FastPass reservations should be cancelled immediately upon canceling or changing your booking. If you change your plans within 60 days then your FastPass reservations need to be recreated. That creates incentive not to change your plans, but also puts you on the same playing field as someone who books a trip less 60 days out! That's fair.

2. No one should be allowed to book FastPasses for any operating day more than 60 days out from that date. If you stay a week then you should need to login daily to create your FastPasses for each day. The 60-day reservation window should be the same for all on property guests. The current system is unfair since it allows people with longer stays to book FastPasses for park days more than 60 days out and puts people with shorter stays at a huge disadvantage.

3. If you no show for your hotel stay or cancel mid-stay. All FP reservations for the stay period made more than 30 days in advance should be cancelled immediately. You loose the benefit.

These three simple changes would make the entire system more equitable for all hotel guests and even park guests who suffer from all you scammers!

So you know exactly what we all do then?

FYI, I am all in favour of closing loopholes. We’re just discussing what has changed. I haven’t seen a single post advocating any kind of scam.

There will never be a system that pleases everyone.

The old FP system benefitted those who got there early. Disney chose to reward those who stay onsite, and from their POV, it makes sense to benefit those staying longest.

And soon they will reward those who choose to pay extra for them anyway.

 

[RollerCoaster]

There will never be a system that pleases everyone.

Disney chose to reward those who stay onsite, and from their POV, it makes sense to benefit those staying longest.

And soon they will reward those who choose to pay extra for them anyway.

There is a perception that Disney is rewarding onsite guests, but the reality is very different. FP+ is no reward for anyone. 60-day reservation windows are no reward.

I've been a regular visitor to WDW, often visiting multiple times in a single year for 20 years. FP+ isn't rewarding anyone. Today you experience less, not because there are more people walking through the gates, but simply because the planning has gotten excessively complicated. Virtual queue systems break when they're put on too many attractions. We're all victims of the serious design flaws of FP+.

Disney failed to realize that the system that was originally in place was pretty darn perfect as is. There wasn't a lot of left to innovate.

The old FP system benefitted those who got there early.

That's actually not true with the exception of the most crowded of days. However, on those peak days getting to the park early is a necessity, not optional.

 

[nickys]

There is a perception that Disney is rewarding onsite guests, but the reality is very different. FP+ is no reward for anyone. 60-day reservation windows are no reward.

That's actually not true with the exception of the most crowded of days. However, on those peak days getting to the park early is a necessity, not optional.

So we are very different kinds of visitors. I go every 3-4 years, staying onsite. The last time was over Christmas. I never, ever rope drop, and we still have fun. I fail to see why getting there early is a necessity, when I can book three FPs from home; we can then turn up to the park at 11am, knowing we can ride our favourite attractions with little wait.

We benefit from the 60 day window, because I can then plan our days at the parks. And some days, we still totally wing it. Yep, even during those crowded park days.

 

[MisterPenguin]

There is a perception that Disney is rewarding onsite guests, but the reality is very different. FP+ is no reward for anyone. 60-day reservation windows are no reward.

I've been a regular visitor to WDW, often visiting multiple times in a single year for 20 years. FP+ isn't rewarding anyone. Today you experience less, not because there are more people walking through the gates, but simply because the planning has gotten excessively complicated. Virtual queue systems break when they're put on too many attractions. We're all victims of the serious design flaws of FP+.

Disney failed to realize that the system that was originally in place was pretty darn perfect as is. There wasn't a lot of left to innovate.



That's actually not true with the exception of the most crowded of days. However, on those peak days getting to the park early is a necessity, not optional.

I've used the 60 FP+ window to score daily FoP rides. It's a reward to me. Thus, your claim it is "no reward" is false.

 

[mikejs78]

It's time to build attractions with IP that people don't really like that much!

Home on the Range spinner confirmed!

I've been a regular visitor to WDW, often visiting multiple times in a single year for 20 years. FP+ isn't rewarding anyone. Today you experience less, not because there are more people walking through the gates, but simply because the planning has gotten excessively complicated. Virtual queue systems break when they're put on too many attractions. We're all victims of the serious design flaws of FP+.

Nice opinions. I can offer counter opinions that are just as valid.

FP+ has made visiting the parks so much easier. Rather than wait in the ridiculously long lines of the late 90s, or run around the park to secure paper FPs and try to daisy-chain FPs as much as possible, I can now pick my top attractions from the comfort of my living room. I can optimize my day by allowing 90 min in the morning to get on as many attractions as possible before the crowds show up, then head to my FP attractions and hardly wait, and then procure additional FPs throughout the day. I can spend a whole day in the park and never wait longer than 30 min. FPP has made my Disney vacations much more relaxing.

 

[RollerCoaster]

My regular experience with Disney dates back to when Annual Passports were unknown and the laminated variety. Anyone who defends FP+ really doesn't have experience with the parks prior to its implementation. I've never heard a long time park regular make a case for FP+. Never. With the exception of the absolute peak days (Christmas to New Years for example) you used to be able get on more attractions, wait in less lines, and experience less overall crowding in the park before FP+.

Good for you that you feel like you can sit on your couch, make your three reservations, and show up late. I could easily do that before FP+, did do so regularly, and I would experience more big attractions in a comparable time period with a late arrival than I do now. Good for you that with your 60 day window you can score a FoP reservation. If the old paper system were in place you'd likely be able to experience FoP multiple times in a day instead of basically once!

It's a total misconception that the original FP required you to show up early. However, if you did arrive at rope drop, you got on so much more in the first 90 minutes than you can now. Remember FP+ reservations start at park opening. The original paper FP return times didn't start until an hour after opening. That first hour of capacity was 100% dedicated to stand-by.

On an average crowd day paper FP return times would be similar to or only slightly longer than stand-by waits. This is when you could really maximize the number of attractions you could experience. That's not the case anymore. Stand-by waits are much longer and significantly so on attractions that didn't used to have FP, nor should they have it.

When it comes to making additional FP+ reservations after your initial three have been used, the availability is so much worse compared to the original paper version. The big ticket rides typically have little or no availability. When I say little I mean the return time may be so far out that it may likely be your last FP+ reservation of the day.

When there were paper FP I would on an average all day visit experience 8-10 attractions using FP. I currently average 4 to 5 in a day, unless the park is unusually uncrowded. The days of experiencing 20+ attractions are hard to accomplish.

The only positive about FP+ is for the times when I want to show up at the park a few of hours before closing. In those instances then I can have three reservations for three big attractions. This is really the only scenario where I am better off than I used to be. However, on days when crowds are light I would say it's not a benefit because stand-by lines that would be short or non-existent in the past are an issue and instead of getting on three big rides in a few hours I might have gotten on 5-8 in the same time period!

There is nothing good about FP+.

 

[MisterPenguin]

My regular experience with Disney dates back to when Annual Passports were unknown and the laminated variety. Anyone who defends FP+ really doesn't have experience with the parks prior to its implementation. I've never heard a long time park regular make a case for FP+. Never. With the exception of the absolute peak days (Christmas to New Years for example) you used to be able get on more attractions, wait in less lines, and experience less overall crowding in the park before FP+.

Good for you that you feel like you can sit on your couch, make your three reservations, and show up late. I could easily do that before FP+, did do so regularly, and I would experience more big attractions in a comparable time period with a late arrival than I do now. Good for you that with your 60 day window you can score a FoP reservation. If the old paper system were in place you'd likely be able to experience FoP multiple times in a day instead of basically once!

It's a total misconception that the original FP required you to show up early. However, if you did arrive at rope drop, you got on so much more in the first 90 minutes than you can now. Remember FP+ reservations start at park opening. The original paper FP return times didn't start until an hour after opening. That first hour of capacity was 100% dedicated to stand-by.

On an average crowd day paper FP return times would be similar to or only slightly longer than stand-by waits. This is when you could really maximize the number of attractions you could experience. That's not the case anymore. Stand-by waits are much longer and significantly so on attractions that didn't used to have FP, nor should they have it.

When it comes to making additional FP+ reservations after your initial three have been used, the availability is so much worse compared to the original paper version. The big ticket rides typically have little or no availability. When I say little I mean the return time may be so far out that it may likely be your last FP+ reservation of the day.

When there were paper FP I would on an average all day visit experience 8-10 attractions using FP. I currently average 4 to 5 in a day, unless the park is unusually uncrowded. The days of experiencing 20+ attractions are hard to accomplish.

The only positive about FP+ is for the times when I want to show up at the park a few of hours before closing. In those instances then I can have three reservations for three big attractions. This is really the only scenario where I am better off than I used to be. However, on days when crowds are light I would say it's not a benefit because stand-by lines that would be short or non-existent in the past are an issue and instead of getting on three big rides in a few hours I might have gotten on 5-8 in the same time period!

There is nothing good about FP+.

You're thinking back to the days when there were 5 million less guests per year... for MK alone. The MK is handling twice the amount of people that it was designed for. FPs didn't make long lines. Huge crowds make long lines, not FP.

You "sitting on your couch" ad hominem is as laughable as your logic.