Is attendance really down at WDW this or…

[el_super]

That is not my understanding at all. The reservations were developed to limit the number of people in the parks as a whole during Covid to avoid overcrowding. It had nothing to do with thinning out the crowds at all. Marie

Avoid overcrowding is the same thing as thinning crowds.

 

[wannabeBelle]

Avoid overcrowding is the same thing as thinning crowds.

During Covid is the important part. It had nothing to do with crowds during a time when there wasnt a global pandemic going on. Marie

 

[monothingie]

Yeah but prior to the pandemic the parks were so packed it was negatively impacting the experience. That's what the reservations were trying to solve. Why would anyone want to go back to that?

If it's worked so well then why are wait times on average greater than or equal to pre-pandemic levels?

The parks still are packed, because they've used the reservation system to dictate capacity ensuring that only the minimum amount of staff are present to satisfy "acceptable" wait times. Of course then that feeds into G+/ILL systems. It's an incredible parasitic relationship.

 

[el_super]

If it's worked so well then why are wait times on average greater than or equal to pre-pandemic levels?

I think the easy answer to that is that the wait times are going up because more people are buying into G+ than they planned. Charging for G+ to limit the use makes sense, but not when everyone is buying in. Prices still need to go up.

The parks still are packed, because they've used the reservation system to dictate capacity ensuring that only the minimum amount of staff are present to satisfy "acceptable" wait times.

That's not how scheduling works at all. Conspiracy theory.

 

[monothingie]

I think the easy answer to that is that the wait times are going up because more people are buying into G+ than they planned. Charging for G+ to limit the use makes sense, but not when everyone is buying in. Prices still need to go up.

Why are more people (forced Ito) buying G+? Because the parks are unusable without it. Why? Because the reservation system gives Disney full control over capacity, something they never had before.

That's not how scheduling works at all. Conspiracy theory.

By preplanning and controlling capacity to minimize expenses?

 

[el_super]

Why are more people (forced Ito) buying G+? Because the parks are unusable without it.

Ok so you think the attendance is down but that the attendance is still so high that people are forced to use G+?

What has happened to the Rides Per Cap number? Has it gone up or down? If people are using G+ AND standby to get more rides done per day, then the experience would still be overall better than it was in 2019 no?

Why? Because the reservation system gives Disney full control over capacity, something they never had before.

They always had control over capacity. Always. And they always did their labor planning and schedule planning a year in advance.

The only thing the reservations are really accomplishing are limiting the number of low value / unfavorable admissions over higher paying admissions. That's an ARPU system, not a capacity system.

 

[LSLS]

Yeah but prior to the pandemic the parks were so packed it was negatively impacting the experience. That's what the reservations were trying to solve. Why would anyone want to go back to that?

That is NOT what they were trying to solve, they were trying to solve paying for workers when they could get by for less. Essentially they didn't want 3 bays open at a Quick Service with 5 people lines each when they could pay for 1 bay open and a line of 15 people.

 

[monothingie]

Ok so you think the attendance is down but that the attendance is still so high that people are forced to use G+?

There are fewer people visiting WDW as compared to pre-pandemic. That is a fact.
Wait times have increased from pre-pandemic levels. That is a fact.
Disney is fully incentivized to keep wait times at specifc levels through various means to ensure an adequate demand for G+/ILL.

What has happened to the Rides Per Cap number? Has it gone up or down? If people are using G+ AND standby to get more rides done per day, then the experience would still be overall better than it was in 2019 no?

If anything wait times have increased and rides per guest have gone down.

They always had control over capacity. Always. And they always did their labor planning and schedule planning a year in advance.

With the Reservation system their forecasting can be almost real time. They've never had that before.

The only thing the reservations are really accomplishing are limiting the number of low value / unfavorable admissions over higher paying admissions. That's an ARPU system, not a capacity system.

The reservation system directs guests to lesser utilized parks in real time. It also limits operational costs by ensuring crowd levels match what labor resources are available. Yes you can filter guests based on their admission type, but that is only relevant during limited time windows in which blackouts already exist for those type guests (AP Holders).

 

[el_super]

That is NOT what they were trying to solve, they were trying to solve paying for workers when they could get by for less.

With the Reservation system their forecasting can be almost real time. They've never had that before.

Real time forecasting? Is that like knowing what is going to happen in the next few seconds?

Budgets and labor planning are done months in advance. At the point that a day is open and available for reservations, they also have a capacity number in mind. They have to know these things when they plan out park hours (which traditionally set capacity/attendance expectations).

All of that is set prior to the schedules being built weeks before the actual day. Do they get it wrong sometimes? Yes. Can they send people home if they aren't needed or call people in if they are? Yes. Has it always been that way? Yes.

Has there always been a directive to keep labor costs down and send home CMs that aren't needed? Since the 1970s. Nothing changed with reservations. Nothing.

 

[Tha Realest]

Has there always been a directive to keep labor costs down and send home CMs that aren't needed? Since the 1970s. Nothing changed with reservations. Nothing.

Except that they know to a near-granular detail who intends to show up at that park on a given day, whereas before it was merely guesswork.

 

[el_super]

If anything wait times have increased and rides per guest have gone down.

How do you know?

I think you're hyperfocused on capacity being down because it's the only part of the puzzle that explains what you want to be true: attendance is down but wait times are still too high.

But attraction capacity doesn't scale that way. You can't adjust for a 3% decrease in attendance by lowering attraction capacity 3%. If you think about something like Tower of Terror, you can maybe reduce capacity 25 or 50 percent but not by 3%. Reducing trains on Big Thunder from 5 to 4 or 3 is going to significantly increase wait times for the savings of maybe 2 CMs. It would be far more noticable.

What you can do, and what they have always done to counteract changes in attendance is reduce or increase park hours. It's far easier to do that across the board then figure out how to reduce labor costs at a fraction of the locations.

But they're not doing that are they?

 

[LSLS]

Real time forecasting? Is that like knowing what is going to happen in the next few seconds?

Budgets and labor planning are done months in advance. At the point that a day is open and available for reservations, they also have a capacity number in mind. They have to know these things when they plan out park hours (which traditionally set capacity/attendance expectations).

All of that is set prior to the schedules being built weeks before the actual day. Do they get it wrong sometimes? Yes. Can they send people home if they aren't needed or call people in if they are? Yes. Has it always been that way? Yes.

Has there always been a directive to keep labor costs down and send home CMs that aren't needed? Since the 1970s. Nothing changed with reservations. Nothing.

The parks absolutely do not have their hourly cast member hours months in advance. They are changing schedules the week before based on tiers of anticipated crowd levels (based on reservations). The reservations had nothing to do with keeping crowds down (at least the last year and a half or so of having them).

I mean, think logically. If it was about keeping capacity down, why were reservations still available for DHS at the end of December, where wait times AVERAGED 75 minutes. Slinky was 156, Tower of Terror was 136, etc. If the idea was so that things were better for guests, would they not have had a limit to make that actually the case? If the reservation threashold was at or near the actual park capacity, what is the reservation doing? Is your logic that the reservations were too keep the average wait time in DHS at 80 minutes because that is the wait time that would make guests happy?

 

[Drdcm]

How do you know?

I think you're hyperfocused on capacity being down because it's the only part of the puzzle that explains what you want to be true: attendance is down but wait times are still too high.

But attraction capacity doesn't scale that way. You can't adjust for a 3% decrease in attendance by lowering attraction capacity 3%. If you think about something like Tower of Terror, you can maybe reduce capacity 25 or 50 percent but not by 3%. Reducing trains on Big Thunder from 5 to 4 or 3 is going to significantly increase wait times for the savings of maybe 2 CMs. It would be far more noticable.

What you can do, and what they have always done to counteract changes in attendance is reduce or increase park hours. It's far easier to do that across the board then figure out how to reduce labor costs at a fraction of the locations.

But they're not doing that are they?

Fewer QS lanes, shorter hours at restaurants, fewer ticket checkers, fewer custodial staff, fewer cooks, fewer cashiers. I mean there’s obviously more to cut based on attendance than ride capacity. You know this and I think you deliberately ignore these inconveniences.

If you think that the reservation system isn’t being used to manage staffing levels, you are delusional.

 

[LSLS]

How do you know?

I think you're hyperfocused on capacity being down because it's the only part of the puzzle that explains what you want to be true: attendance is down but wait times are still too high.

But attraction capacity doesn't scale that way. You can't adjust for a 3% decrease in attendance by lowering attraction capacity 3%. If you think about something like Tower of Terror, you can maybe reduce capacity 25 or 50 percent but not by 3%. Reducing trains on Big Thunder from 5 to 4 or 3 is going to significantly increase wait times for the savings of maybe 2 CMs. It would be far more noticable.

What you can do, and what they have always done to counteract changes in attendance is reduce or increase park hours. It's far easier to do that across the board then figure out how to reduce labor costs at a fraction of the locations.

But they're not doing that are they?

Nobody is saying they are adjusting for a 3% decrease in attendance. They weren't using reservations to calculate to the nearest 100 people. But they are using it to setup groups of attendance and base staffing on that. Like Group 1 is 30k-35k, Group 2 is 35k-40k, etc. Then they use the reservations along with calculation on the estimated number of reservations to expect the week of to base staffing for the week. So for a Group 3 day, they may have 4 trains. A Group 1 day, they drop it down to 3 trains. Now, that's assuming they were THAT extreme with it, which I'm not sure they were. Could be one person checking restraints instead of 2 on a ride. So instead of dispatching every 2 minutes, it dispatches ever 3 minutes. Again, I won't say that it is used to that extent on rides. But I can promise you it is used elsewhere. Group 2 day, 2 bays open at the restaurants. Group 1, drop that down to 1 bay. Same at stores. There is 0 doubt in my mind that occurs.

 

[JoeCamel]

Nobody is saying they are adjusting for a 3% decrease in attendance. They weren't using reservations to calculate to the nearest 100 people. But they are using it to setup groups of attendance and base staffing on that. Like Group 1 is 30k-35k, Group 2 is 35k-40k, etc. Then they use the reservations along with calculation on the estimated number of reservations to expect the week of to base staffing for the week. So for a Group 3 day, they may have 4 trains. A Group 1 day, they drop it down to 3 trains. Now, that's assuming they were THAT extreme with it, which I'm not sure they were. Could be one person checking restraints instead of 2 on a ride. So instead of dispatching every 2 minutes, it dispatches ever 3 minutes. Again, I won't say that it is used to that extent on rides. But I can promise you it is used elsewhere. Group 2 day, 2 bays open at the restaurants. Group 1, drop that down to 1 bay. Same at stores. There is 0 doubt in my mind that occurs.

A larger issue is that they set a staffing level for Group 1 that is less than is needed to provide the experience people were taught to expect. Like starting a race two steps behind optimal. Everything cascades from there in the name of being "data driven" to maximize profit centers.

 

[el_super]

So for a Group 3 day, they may have 4 trains. A Group 1 day, they drop it down to 3 trains. Now, that's assuming they were THAT extreme with it, which I'm not sure they were.

You're literally describing how the system as worked since the 1970s.

The only thing the reservations can change is knowing there is more demand than you planned for and making more reservations available. How often have they done that?

They're certainly not pulling back staffing or park hours on days when the reservations are fully backed out. It's not used that way.

 

[el_super]

If you think that the reservation system isn’t being used to manage staffing levels, you are delusional.

Except it's the truth. Accept it or not.

In the past they used the in park turnstile counts to make staffing decisions on the fly. You think they prefer reservation data over that?

 

[Disstevefan1]

In the past they used the in park turnstile counts to make staffing decisions on the fly. You think they prefer reservation data over that?

I HATE the reservation system!

BUT -

YES I think they prefer to use reservation data to make staffing decisions ahead of times instead of making them on the fly.

I am guessing before reservations, they had to "best guess" at staffing and the last thing they want is to pay for more staff then they need.

 

[wannabeBelle]

Except it's the truth. Accept it or not.

In the past they used the in park turnstile counts to make staffing decisions on the fly. You think they prefer reservation data over that?

But the reservation data is incomplete as only certain groups need to make park reservations and only sometimes. At this point it may not be having the same benefit it did previously as far as staffing goes. Marie

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Oh for sure. Like I said, I wish Disney hadn't discontinued the service.

But I think it will surprise none of us to say that Disney makes decisions like this all the time, which improve the bottom line in the shorter term but impact their cultural cachet in ways that are harder to calculate. And also harder to correct.

Some would say decisions like those are how we end up with *gestures broadly at the current state of things*

You just encapsulated why it’s indisputable they need new management

They are failing across all business segments

The current group has lost it…and just like the previous one…won’t get it back