News FPs cancelled when Hotel room cancelled

[drizgirl]

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+.

Who doesn't love a good ride rationing system?

 

[mikejs78]

Anyone who defends FP+ really doesn't have experience with the parks prior to its implementation.

That's a false statement, because I do remember the days before FP+. Went for years. There are some things I don't like about it (tiering being the main one) but overall I'm happy with it.

 

[Hawg G]

That's a false statement, because I do remember the days before FP+. Went for years. There are some things I don't like about it (tiering being the main one) but overall I'm happy with it.

But you can't honestly say it is as good as regular FP. Or even half as good. You are happy because enough years have passed you don't really remember how good it was.

 

[Hawg G]

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.

The huge crowds are because Disney didn't build hardly any new rides for 20 years.

 

[Ripken10]

The huge crowds are because Disney didn't build hardly any new rides for 20 years.

That statement actually makes no sense what so ever. So based on what you said -- Disney's crowds at the Magic Kingdom have doubled because they built no new rides for 20 years. Moreover, you are saying if they had built new rides, less people would have come to the Magic Kingdom.

 

[mikejs78]

But you can't honestly say it is as good as regular FP. Or even half as good. You are happy because enough years have passed you don't really remember how good it was.

How can you tell me how I think or feel? I can honestly say that, for me, the new system is better in a lot of ways, worse in others.

I wouldn't presume to say that because I think FP+ is better overall than FP, that you should feel that way. Which one is better is a matter of opinion and taste, and different people come from different perspectives. It's different than if I said, for example, that crowds are lower now than they were 10 years ago. That's demonstrably false and based in objective facts. But whether the current FP system is better or worse is purely a matter of opinion, and to project your own feelings on it onto others and imply that they are delusional and don't remember the old system is presumptuous.

 

[Trackmaster]

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!

1. Yeah, I agree with this. I doubt that many people are going to book at the Grand Floridian but then just want to stay at the All-Star instead. If so, they should have their replacement plans ready when switching, and not need a few day grace period.
2. Nah, the way Disney does it makes total sense. Why should guests have to login multiple times? More importantly, Disney is a business. They love it when people stay longer. Why incentivize people to have shorter stays?
3. Kind of sounds like the same concept as #1, but correct.

I'll add an addendum that may be unpopular, but I think practical and wise for the business:

Expand the pool of available FP+ by 15%, but change the rule so that cancelled FP+ or switched out FP+ are never replaced, or pick whatever % you need to equilibrate the number of used FP+ based on the expected cancellations. The "pound the app trick" pretty much takes away the benefit of early booking, and just adds something that is annoying and a waste of time just to stay competitive and get what you need. More importantly, it puts a huge strain on Disney's servers and jams them up.

Short of that, Disney could lock out accounts for an hour if there's too much pounding going on. They could say something like "Whoa, you're doing way too much, come back in an hour when you've made up your mind" if you're clearly refreshing way too much.

 

[mikejs78]

1. Yeah, I agree with this. I doubt that many people are going to book at the Grand Floridian but then just want to stay at the All-Star instead. If so, they should have their replacement plans ready when switching, and not need a few day grace period.
2. Nah, the way Disney does it makes total sense. Why should guests have to login multiple times? More importantly, Disney is a business. They love it when people stay longer. Why incentivize people to have shorter stays?
3. Kind of sounds like the same concept as #1, but correct.

I'll add an addendum that may be unpopular, but I think practical and wise for the business:

Expand the pool of available FP+ by 15%, but change the rule so that cancelled FP+ or switched out FP+ are never replaced, or pick whatever % you need to equilibrate the number of used FP+ based on the expected cancellations. The "pound the app trick" pretty much takes away the benefit of early booking, and just adds something that is annoying and a waste of time just to stay competitive and get what you need. More importantly, it puts a huge strain on Disney's servers and jams them up.

Short of that, Disney could lock out accounts for an hour if there's too much pounding going on. They could say something like "Whoa, you're doing way too much, come back in an hour when you've made up your mind" if you're clearly refreshing way too much.

I don't think refreshing is gaming the system. It's using it and checking for availability. I don't see any reason for them to do this, and frankly I don't see it as a waste of time at all - it takes far less time to do that than to wait in a standby line.

Plus, the level of load it places on a server should be minimal considering the type of API request it is. I don't see how taking this away is at all practical and beneficial to the business. This refresh approach allows people unable to book ahead of time an opportunity to get good FPs.

 

[Trackmaster]

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+.

Your production in a day has little to do with what type of virtual queuing system is in place. Its about crowds and throughput. FP+ doesn't takeaway or add capacity, it just rations it. If you were getting 8-10 a day, and are now doing 4-5 day, it either means that crowds were lower back then, capacity was higher, or the system was rigged to benefit someone like you, and siphon rides from other people.

How a park should ration rides is a deeply interesting and philosophic debate, but if your production has been throttled, its not due to FP+, it has to do with Disney doing very well, or them just creating more low capacity rides. To me, while Fast Pass was a virtual queuing system, FP+ is a reservation and a rationing system. Disney can't supply everyone who passes through the gates with 10-20 ride laps per day. They can give people 3-5 laps a day on busy days. Maybe 10+ on less crowded days. If a few people got crazy high production because they gamed the system, a lot of people wouldn't get on anything. FP+ is intended to give people guaranteed production without any tricks or schemes... but the pound the app trick is ruining a lot of that in my opinion.

FP+ benefits AP holders the most, as you can stop in whenever you want, get your three guaranteed rides with no wait, and anything else is icing on the cake. It works best if you only stay a few hours and go home.

FP+ benefits hotel guests, as you get an extended window of exclusivity, and you get guaranteed production at a park that you may not get to for years again. So if you stay a week, you're guaranteed to get on everything and you know this beforehand.

FP+ I guess hurts people who assume that Disney is something to game and that you're entitled to 20+ laps a day on a busy day at the most popular parks in the world. But as I've been saying, they've left a huge loophole open with the pound the app trick. So that's a big trick that you can take advantage of to pretty much kill the 60 benefit.

 

[mikejs78]

but the pound the app trick is ruining a lot of that in my opinion.

How so? You can make the reservations ahead of time, and day of it becomes a virtual queue. Pound the app is not ruining anything as it doesn't effect the reservation system.

 

[Hawg G]

That statement actually makes no sense what so ever. So based on what you said -- Disney's crowds at the Magic Kingdom have doubled because they built no new rides for 20 years. Moreover, you are saying if they had built new rides, less people would have come to the Magic Kingdom.

No, clearly it meant the huge crowds, perceived by visitors, are because Disney has not done anything to react to their massive increase in visitors. Nor do/did they care. I believe there was an internal survey done about 3-4 years ago that raised an enormous red flag that led to the D23 presentation .

Plus, remember FP+ pushed lots of folks out of ride lines, and in to food lines. Which was a BIG part of the program's design.

 

[Lensman]

How so? You can make the reservations ahead of time, and day of it becomes a virtual queue. Pound the app is not ruining anything as it doesn't effect the reservation system.

I agree.

I also worry that the pound the app trick* will be replaced with the "sell FastPasses for money" trick.

Note: I use the term "trick", but I think it is a perfectly reasonable trick, much like the trick of getting a new FastPass for ToT, then waiting in the standby line for RnRC, or the trick of using the standby line for FoP less than an hour before closing, or the trick of rope dropping the park. Besides, even if we define pounding the app as a trick, we can solve the problem with a little flood control and forcing 30 seconds between refreshes. Also, I'd be on the fence about democratization by enabling alerts and push notifications for FastPass availability - though if they made that complicated enough it might make me happy because that would give me an advantage while disadvantaging the technically inept. Sad of me, I know.

 

[RollerCoaster]

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.

Your statement tells me that you don't understand the concept of virtual queues, like FastPass. The increase in attendance is only a small part of the big elephant. The park's capacity is determined by the number of attractions and the hourly throughput of each, not the size of the park itself.

What you don't understand is that a virtual queue essentially makes each person into two people. While your virtual self is waiting in line for an attraction, your physical self is off doing something else. That's why stand-by lines are longer, food and beverage facilities are busier, and walkways are more crowded.

Magic Kingdom was easily designed to handle the crowds that it accommodates. Disneyland is significantly smaller and handles crowds almost as big as Magic Kingdom. Crowding is getting more problematic and the biggest culprit is the increase in the number of FP attractions. There is a very good reason why Disney is not implementing FP on the attractions in StarWars land at the onset.

FP+ is a disaster. On paper it looked like a dream, but put in practice it's a mess.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Your statement tells me that you don't understand the concept of virtual queues, like FastPass. The increase in attendance is only a small part of the big elephant.

No, it's almost the whole elephant. Your statements tell me that you don't understand the nature of "tipping points", which are the moments that systems can't process the number of things/people that present themselves to be processed, and thus, there is a back up.

If a ride can handle 1000 people an hour, then whether there are 10, 150, 600, or 999 people an hour showing up, there will be no line. But if 1100 people show up in an hour, then there will be 100 people at the end of the hour that are in a line waiting. And if that happens for the next 9 hours, then there will be 1000 people in the queue.

That's a tipping point. And when a particular ride or entire park hits it, there will be lines whether there's no FP, paper FP, or FP+. No system or lack of system can make those lines disappear unless you limit the number of people who enter the park.

It's the crowds causing crowding, not FP in any version. FP(+) just moves people around within the queues, it can never eliminate queues. And the elimination of FP altogether won't eliminate queues either.

Just because FP and FP+ appeared at the time lines started to form and get very long doesn't mean there's a cause and effect. Correlation is not causation. It was that crowding that cause FP and FP+ to be invented.

 

[RollerCoaster]

No, it's almost the whole elephant. Your statements tell me that you don't understand the nature of "tipping points", which are the moments that systems can't process the number of things/people that present themselves to be processed, and thus, there is a back up.

If a ride can handle 1000 people an hour, then whether there are 10, 150, 600, or 999 people an hour showing up, there will be no line. But if 1100 people show up in an hour, then there will be 100 people at the end of the hour that are in a line waiting. And if that happens for the next 9 hours, then there will be 1000 people in the queue.

That's a tipping point. And when a particular ride or entire park hits it, there will be lines whether there's no FP, paper FP, or FP+. No system or lack of system can make those lines disappear unless you limit the number of people who enter the park.

It's the crowds causing crowding, not FP in any version. FP(+) just moves people around within the queues, it can never eliminate queues. And the elimination of FP altogether won't eliminate queues either.

Just because FP and FP+ appeared at the time lines started to form and get very long doesn't mean there's a cause and effect. Correlation is not causation. It was that crowding that cause FP and FP+ to be invented.

Exactly... you don't understand virtual queues.

For the record there were lines before FP.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Exactly... you don't understand virtual queues.

For the record there were lines before FP.

Not as much and they were concentrated at a few "E Ticket" rides.

So, exactly, you don't understand "more people".

 

[bUU]

However they won't admit failure

Perhaps it isn't a failure in the context of their goals and objectives.

One or the other.

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.

As a resort guests, I feel rewarded by having the opportunity to book FP+s 30 days prior to other guests.

Anyone who defends FP+ really doesn't have experience with the parks prior to its implementation.

I had a Florida Resident Pass (laminated variety) over twenty five years ago.

Maybe you should give the absolutism a rest, since you seem to be pretty far off target with most of what you're saying in this thread.

 

[mikejs78]

Your statement tells me that you don't understand the concept of virtual queues, like FastPass. The increase in attendance is only a small part of the big elephant. The park's capacity is determined by the number of attractions and the hourly throughput of each, not the size of the park itself.

What you don't understand is that a virtual queue essentially makes each person into two people

Exactly... you don't understand virtual queues.

For the record there were lines before FP.

Apparently, neither do you. Virtual queues don't make a person into two people. It doesn't work that way.

Just because a person has a slot in a line, it doesn't change the capacity or througput of an attraction. A virtual queue doesn't make a person two people, it saves a place in line while a person does something else. It doesn't change the capacity of the attraction or the throughput. What it does is distribute people from higher demand attractions to lower demand attractions, and from peak times to off peak times (since there are a limited # of FPs per hour at any given attraction). Just because you are able to do something else it doesn't change the capacity and throughput of any attraction at a given time during the day, and the idea that it effectively doubles you as a person is a fallicy and not supported by basic queuing theory.

@MisterPenguin is more correct in his analysis of tipping points, which is a better explanation for the crowding over the past few years.

 

[plkkak]

FP+ is not a virtual queueing system. It is scheduled allocated capacity. A virtual queue would be ordered and would result in absolutely no wait assuming you could time your walk-up correctly.

If standby lines for an attraction are still present when FP+ is utilized for an attraction, and they are close to their upper bound compared to what they would be if FP+ wasn’t utilized, then FP+ is not contributing to excess crowding in the park because the same effective number of people are queueing, some just for much less time than others.

 

[Hawg G]

FP+ is not a virtual queueing system. It is scheduled allocated capacity. A virtual queue would be ordered and would result in absolutely no wait assuming you could time your walk-up correctly.

If standby lines for an attraction are still present when FP+ is utilized for an attraction, and they are close to their upper bound compared to what they would be if FP+ wasn’t utilized, then FP+ is not contributing to excess crowding in the park because the same effective number of people are queueing, some just for much less time than others.

FP+ has royally screwed up WDW. That is the basic fact. Anyone arguing that point please tell me why they aren't using it on their two biggest rides, arguably EVER.

It does many things. It DOES turn you in to two people, regardless of what others say. That's the meaning of "virtual". There is now Me and "Virtual Me" visiting WDW. I can send Virtual Me to go do the arduous task of waiting in a 2 hour long standby line, and then take his place when there is 15 minutes left. VIrtual Me really gets screwed, as he doesn't get to ride anything.

While Virtual Me is waiting, I can wait for another ride, eat, hit the head, or just relax. There are most certainly TWO "me"s there.

Also, FP+, since it makes some rides nearly impossible to ride, pushes the rubes to lower end rides. In large amounts. That is why Pirates didn't have a line for decades, and now is always 30 minutes. People throw in the towel on the big rides, and now get to go experience Philharmagic with NO WAIT. Now THAT's magical.

The core problem at WDW, and especially MK is without a doubt Disney's 19 year run of just hoarding cash and not adding capacity to it's parks that even came close to matching the increase in park attendance. They reaped those rewards for a long time, and now are forced to spend billions on a crowd problem, knowing those billions aren't even going to solve the problem.

H