Lightning Lane at Walt Disney World

[MickeyLuv'r]

- I’m not going to let foolish executives take possession of something I love.

Huh?

 

[Animaniac93-98]

There is a reason Universal abandoned their grand plans for virtual queues, because they blew up spectacularly at Volcano Bay.

On a recent visit to Volcano Bay I was told that because I had one tapu tapu I could not get in line for another slide, despite that slide's line being only 10 min.

Tapu Tapu only really works if some other slide or thing says "ride now", but there may only be a limited number of things where that's the case depending upon what time of day it is.

At least I was able to maximize my time with the early entry for hotel guests.

 

[Chi84]

Huh?

Yeah I was thinking that ship had already sailed

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'll grant, HS doesn't have enough attractions. In that park it is a problem. AK would also benefit from more.

In MK though, uneven distribution of crowds is a very big factor. That's basically the whole premise of touring plans - to zig when the crowd zags.

I strongly agree more dining capacity is needed, but I also have a long history of zigging when the crowd zags. A very simple step is to avoid eating lunch exactly at noon.

Another similar zig is to avoid breakfast rush hour at the hotel food courts. When 3 of the 4 parks all opened at 9am, the food court breakfast rush hour was crazy. About 8:15am all the food courts would all be nearly empty. At 8:25am, they were a madhouse! It was amazing the difference 10 minutes made. Yet MANY people don't stop to think about it at all. They see a busy food court without ever really considering that a shift of just 5minutes would save them10+minutes of waiting.

Attractions aren't quite that simple, but there are ample opportunities for optimization of distribution, though it won't help me personally at all.

Just look at how much smaller Disneyland has compared to Magic Kingdom. The park needs things that don’t induce demand like the cancelled Main Street Theater.

Sure, there are things everyone wanting to eat at the same time, but again, the world’s most visited theme park still hasn’t fully replaced the dining capacity lost by closing the Adventureland Veranda and Tomorrowland Terrace. That right there should speak volumes. That’s a gap that needs more than just optimization.

Being too optimized is also a problem. Slack let’s you absorb unforeseen circumstances. Expedition Everest has its first refurbishment closure scheduled after more than 15 years of continuous operation. That isn’t just because Disney doesn’t want to disappoint people by not having it open but also because even now it would be a huge capacity hit and would have been even more so before Pandora opened. Some excess capacity is important to enabling you to easily absorb losses, both planned and unplanned.

 

[lazyboy97o]

On a recent visit to Volcano Bay I was told that because I had one tapu tapu I could not get in line for another slide, despite that slide's line being only 10 min.

Tapu Tapu only really works if some other slide or thing says "ride now", but there may only be a limited number of things where that's the case depending upon what time of day it is.

At least I was able to maximize my time with the early entry for hotel guests.

Exactly. Unless you severely limit capacity and strictly schedule everyone then you need [more] things that can just fill time. Water parks at least have wave pools and lazy rivers that can be capacity monsters but even those filled up when Volcano Bay first opened. Those early days really were the extreme example of how nobody was in a queue for an attraction but was still stuck waiting around somewhere else.

Jimmy Fallon’s Race Through New York and Fast & Furious: Supercharged we’re also supposed to be the start of moving the theme parks to virtual queues. Fallon didn’t have a Stand-By option when it opened.

 

[Patcheslee]

If people don't want to do Magic Carpets of Aladdin AND Rock 'N Roller Coaster than they're not real Disney fans and should never have gone to Walt Disney Studios Park.

Magic Carpets turn into a competition of either my 13yo or husband trying to get each other wet If RnRC was in the same park it be good for a blow dry too

On a recent visit to Volcano Bay I was told that because I had one tapu tapu I could not get in line for another slide, despite that slide's line being only 10 min.

Tapu Tapu only really works if some other slide or thing says "ride now", but there may only be a limited number of things where that's the case depending upon what time of day it is.

At least I was able to maximize my time with the early entry for hotel guests.

We kinda enjoyed the TapuTapu, wait times were spent in the wave pool or one of the rivers.

 

[flynnibus]

Again, these a very specific personal uses of the system built on your personal knowledge and preferences

 

[DKampy]

What time did DHS close last night? Could it be an effort to discourage guests from getting on line too close to closing time?

Uhhh…. What….I rode Rise this last Wednesday night it was a posted 45 minutes and we got on in about 30….but I saw nothing even close to a 215 minute wait

 

[LittleBuford]

I didn’t know complaining on a Disney planning site had the power to do this. If it does, the executives are doomed.

The complaints themselves are perfectly legitimate. I may not agree with them, but they're clearly coming from a genuine place, and I commend some of our more passionate posters for the strength of their convictions. It's not for me to tell anyone that their experience of WDW is wrong, or that they should stop going if they no longer enjoy themselves as they once did, or that they need to come around to my way of seeing things. Contrary to what was suggested in an earlier post, I have no intention whatsoever of limiting what we discuss or changing anyone's mind. The only thing I take issue with is the notion that those of us who aren't complaining have been hoodwinked and that we must, moreover, be made to see that we've been hoodwinked. I draw the line at being told that I have been tricked into enjoying myself or that I'm being selfish by not privileging others' subjective opinions over my own lived experiences. It really feels like a form of evangelism at times, and I don't fully understand what those proselytising hope to achieve.

If people insist on framing the issue in moral terms, I fail to see why my relationship with Disney is any more detrimental to the common good than that of park-goers who have a much more negative view of the company. At the end of the day, our money is all going to the same place. Complaining doesn't offset one's financial contribution, and I daresay that some of the least satisfied posters here continue to spend far more time and money at WDW than I do.

 

[Chi84]

The complaints themselves are perfectly legitimate. I may not agree with them, but they're clearly coming from a genuine place, and I commend some of our more passionate posters for the strength of their convictions. It's not for me to tell anyone that their experience of WDW is wrong, or that they should stop going if they no longer enjoy themselves as they once did, or that they need to come around to my way of seeing things. Contrary to what was suggested in an earlier post, I have no intention whatsoever of limiting what we discuss or changing anyone's mind. The only thing I take issue with is the notion that those of us who aren't complaining have been hoodwinked and that we must, moreover, be made to see that we've been hoodwinked. I draw the line at being told that I have been tricked into enjoying myself or that I'm being selfish by not privileging others' subjective opinions over my own lived experiences. It really feels like a form of evangelism at times, and I don't fully understand what those proselytising hope to achieve.

If people insist on framing the issue in moral terms, I fail to see why my relationship with Disney is any more detrimental to the common good than that of park-goers who have a much more negative view of the company. At the end of the day, our money is all going to the same place. Complaining doesn't offset one's financial contribution, and I daresay that some of the least satisfied posters here continue to spend far more time and money at WDW than I do.

I actually deleted my comment shortly after posting it. The complaining doesn’t bother me as much as the assertion that people who buy Genie+, go to the Boo Bash or purchase any of Disney’s current offerings are being selfish and ruining WDW for others.

There are appropriate instances to call upon others to make sacrifices and act selflessly. This isn’t one them. Expecting people to modify their discretionary spending on a ridiculously expensive vacation to achieve someone else’s vision (or memory) of WDW is unrealistic and unreasonable.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Please reread my post, which you have clearly misunderstood. It’s not your views or experiences of the parks that I consider perverse—on the contrary, I’ve stated multiple times that we are all entitled to our own preferences—but rather the practice of dogmatically insisting that others must be mistaken to feel as they do. Respectful or productive discussion is simply impossible when such zealotry is at play.

I read your post very carefully, thanks. You refer to those who “no longer enjoy WDW yet continue to spend their time and money there” and then suggest “they should face their own ambivalence and inconsistency” rather then challenge your opinions. You are, quite nastily, suggesting first that those who engage critically with Disney don’t enjoy it and that they have unresolved personal issues that spring from and spur there discontent. You are presenting their experience as of inferior value to your own. Before you edited the above response, if I recall, you denied attacking the opinions of other posters, exactly what you are doing. You seem to have walked that back to focus on the specific word “perverse,” where you are on firmer ground, and ignore the rest of your original post. But in these conversations you have been the one attacking other people by implying they are zealots or are otherwise maladjusted.

At the heart of this debate is the fact that our perception may be incorrect. Above, Mike suggested my perception of the comparative crowds in the park was incorrect, a perfectly valid argument. It is not an insult nor is it outside the bounds of polite conversation to suggest that your perception of line-management software being beneficial may overlook key realities, even if ultimately you feel the perceived value outweighs the drawbacks.

 

[UNCgolf]

As I said, adding attractions hasn’t reduced crowds in the past; it simply encourages more people to come. I have never struggled to find things to do during my trips; on the contrary, I usually run out of time before I get through my list, and that’s with line-skipping.

I don't think there's much evidence to suggest that adding new attractions increases attendance. It may have 25 years ago, but it doesn't seem to now, at least not to any significant effect beyond a potential short-term bump when the new attraction opens.

They also desperately need to add more dining.

 

[flynnibus]

I actually deleted my comment shortly after posting it. The complaining doesn’t bother me as much as the assertion that people who buy Genie+, go to the Boo Bash or purchase any of Disney’s current offerings are being selfish and ruining WDW for others.

You leave out some big important pieces to leap to that damnation to reject.

People didn't suggest buying those products makes you selfish...

But when people basically say they only care about their experience when discussing a larger operation - that is the very definition of selfish.

And when people do buy a product, they do contribute to the success and perception of that product for the company. So yes, there is 'consequence' to one's buying behavior to other people.

Those are different assertions - not saying 'buying makes you selfish'. It's that people's decisions do influence others because we all buy from the same company. It's not the buying that is selfish behavior.

Buying does have a impact on the grand scheme... the success (or not) of a product will influence the products everyone gets. Yet some continue to act like every consumer is in a vacuum from each other??

So call it 'selfish arguments' or logic - not 'selfish buying'

 

[flynnibus]

As I said, adding attractions hasn’t reduced crowds in the past; it simply encourages more people to come

A gross simplification because it makes all attractions somehow equal - which they aren't. Some attractions are headliners, others are not. Both both represent power to absorb park demand. Also, when the company continues to build attractions with smaller capacity, it's not the 'more people come' problem alone that makes crowding/waits and issue.. but simply the new thing is undersized.

This trope of 'new attractions make things worse' is such a gross simplification to support a predisposed conclusion... 'we don't want to add more'.

The reality is far far more intricate then simply 'adding attractions'. The real answers lie in the total operations of the parks and their abilities vs their overheads.

 

[LittleBuford]

I don't think there's much evidence to suggest that adding new attractions increases attendance. It may have 25 years ago, but it doesn't seem to now, at least not to any significant effect beyond a potential short-term bump when the new attraction opens.

They also desperately need to add more dining.

Is there any evidence that adding attractions decreases crowds?

 

[Chi84]

Yet some continue to act like every consumer is in a vacuum from each other??

So what do you suggest customers of Disney do in order to demonstrate understanding that their behavior has consequences for others?

 

[LittleBuford]

I read your post very carefully, thanks. You refer to those who “no longer enjoy WDW yet continue to spend their time and money there” and then suggest “they should face their own ambivalence and inconsistency” rather then challenge your opinions. You are, quite nastily, suggesting first that those who engage critically with Disney don’t enjoy it and that they have unresolved personal issues that spring from and spur there discontent. You are presenting their experience as of inferior value to your own. Before you edited the above response, if I recall, you denied attacking the opinions of other posters, exactly what you are doing. You seem to have walked that back to focus on the specific word “perverse,” where you are on firmer ground, and ignore the rest of your original post. But in these conversations you have been the one attacking other people by implying they are zealots or are otherwise maladjusted.

At the heart of this debate is the fact that our perception may be incorrect. Above, Mike suggested my perception of the comparative crowds in the park was incorrect, a perfectly valid argument. It is not an insult nor is it outside the bounds of polite conversation to suggest that your perception of line-management software being beneficial may overlook key realities, even if ultimately you feel the perceived value outweighs the drawbacks.

You are perfectly free to tell me that my perception of a situation (crowding, capacity, etc.) is incorrect. Where I draw the line is at being told that my perception of my own enjoyment is incorrect. Yes, you and others come across as unreasonably zealous when you insist that those of us who like Disney are being duped.

For my part, I apologise for using language that upset you, but I stand by my claim that there is something perverse about criticising the way others choose to spend their dollars at Disney if you yourself continue to line the company’s pockets.

 

[flynnibus]

So what do you suggest customers of Disney do in order to demonstrate understanding that their behavior has consequences for others?

Simply acknowledge the butterfly effect instead of try to bail out of every corner with "well it works for me... bye".

I mean, we're not talking about people invading trip reports and challenging what people did or felt... we're here talking about business strategies, product strategy, the market itself, and how it plays out for WDW.

If people are only concerned with THEIR impression of things - why engage in a discussion about the whole in the first place?

 

[Chi84]

Simply acknowledge the butterfly effect instead of try to bail out of every corner with "well it works for me... bye".

I mean, we're not talking about people invading trip reports and challenging what people did or felt... we're here talking about business strategies, product strategy, the market itself, and how it plays out for WDW.

If people are only concerned with THEIR impression of things - why engage in a discussion about the whole in the first place?

What do you mean by acknowledging the butterfly effect? What specific effect do you want people to acknowledge?

It sounds as though you’re saying it’s okay for someone to choose what products to buy as long as that person acknowledges that his decisions are detrimental to others. In other words, it’s okay to vacation the way you want as long as you feel bad about it. No thanks, I’m good.

 

[lazyboy97o]

What do you mean by acknowledging the butterfly effect? What specific effect do you want people to acknowledge?

It sounds as though you’re saying it’s okay for someone to choose what products to buy as long as that person acknowledges that his decisions are detrimental to others. In other words, it’s okay to vacation the way you want as long as you feel bad about it. No thanks, I’m good.

Do you think most people used FastPass+ to go somewhere completely different?