Lightning Lane at Walt Disney World

[Chip Chipperson]

Very well-said. They do send out fairly specific guest experience surveys - I would love to know how the average guest is responding to this new system.

Oddly enough, I never received one after our trip earlier this month. I've literally received one after every trip since we started going regularly back in 2015, but our longest trip to date was this one and I didn't get one. Perhaps we didn't spend enough time in the parks for their liking, but you'd think they'd want to know what changed for this trip compared to previous trips - but maybe they assume they know the answer and don't want to hear it from another guest (it was a mix of crowd levels and G+ being a bad service).

 

[mikejs78]

Very well-said. They do send out fairly specific guest experience surveys - I would love to know how the average guest is responding to this new system.

I do wonder how GSATs are for Genie+.

Notice no one is talking about Genie.

 

[lazyboy97o]

o system is going to work great for everyone (due to a general lack of capacity compared to crowds) as it is all just shuffling deckchairs. But there's probably some system (even if it is paid) that would be most accepted and "liked" and I don't think Genie+ is it. Considering how much goodwill is being burned through right now, the company would benefit from figuring out a system that would be viewed more positively by most guests and encourage return visits in the future.

The base metric that makes people happy is attractions per guest per hour. No system is going to somehow change that base fundamental desire of most guests.

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would FP+ require more staffing than G+? The same rides/shows are included (aside from possibly some shows that haven't reopened) and the park hours are whatever WDW says they are no matter which system is in place. If anything, they need more people at the Guest Services umbrellas throughout the parks because people need help with or have complaints about G+.

FastPass+ commits to operating at a certain capacity months in advance. The dream was to reduce staffing to just barely enough but now Disney like so many others needs more staff.

Those umbrellas started popping up everywhere in response to FastPass+.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

The base metric that makes people happy is attractions per guest per hour. No system is going to somehow change that base fundamental desire of most guests.


FastPass+ commits to operating at a certain capacity months in advance. The dream was to reduce staffing to just barely enough but now Disney like so many others needs more staff.

Those umbrellas started popping up everywhere in response to FastPass+.

But it's only committing to operating at the same capacity as the number of guests who have booked a Park Reservation. They could shorten the window from 60 days down to 30 for resort guests and maybe 2 weeks for non-resort guests. If the idea is to have an accurate estimate of how many guests will be at each park, then combining the Park Reservations with the ability to book LL selections in advance would be a better tool for them than the current system that offers no incentive for guests to tell them where they're going to be in advance aside from the busiest times of year (which most guests are smart enough to know they should book in advance, anyway).

 

[lazyboy97o]

But it's only committing to operating at the same capacity as the number of guests who have booked a Park Reservation. They could shorten the window from 60 days down to 30 for resort guests and maybe 2 weeks for non-resort guests. If the idea is to have an accurate estimate of how many guests will be at each park, then combining the Park Reservations with the ability to book LL selections in advance would be a better tool for them than the current system that offers no incentive for guests to tell them where they're going to be in advance aside from the busiest times of year (which most guests are smart enough to know they should book in advance, anyway).

It is still committing to something that was already not actually a constant.

The current system allows Disney to adjust to the current situation instead of what was offered months ago. If an attraction has a part break and can’t open that day or has to open late it just isn’t part of Genie+. You’re not offering a bunch of passes for people to take and strain other attractions as was done with FastPass+. How much is offered can be dialed up and down and managed.

 

[GimpYancIent]

It is still committing to something that was already not actually a constant.

The current system allows Disney to adjust to the current situation instead of what was offered months ago. If an attraction has a part break and can’t open that day or has to open late it just isn’t part of Genie+. You’re not offering a bunch of passes for people to take and strain other attractions as was done with FastPass+. How much is offered can be dialed up and down and managed.

Finally. Genie +, confirmed it's about what is convenient, beneficial and profitable for Disney, the guests are merely monetary resources to be exploited.

 

[pdude81]

It is still committing to something that was already not actually a constant.

The current system allows Disney to adjust to the current situation instead of what was offered months ago. If an attraction has a part break and can’t open that day or has to open late it just isn’t part of Genie+. You’re not offering a bunch of passes for people to take and strain other attractions as was done with FastPass+. How much is offered can be dialed up and down and managed.

Other than headliners which they sell out for the whole day. But if they at least have some other capacity they haven't given out yet it helps.

 

[doctornick]

The base metric that makes people happy is attractions per guest per hour. No system is going to somehow change that base fundamental desire of most guests.

What you have to do to get on those attractions (and how much you spend doing so) would dramatically impact guest satisfaction. Sure, total attractions experienced would be a big driver, but it certainly isn't the only factor.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Finally. Genie +, confirmed it's about what is convenient, beneficial and profitable for Disney, the guests are merely monetary resources to be expoloited.

FastPass+ and NextGen were very much about trying to benefit Disney, but there are points of mutual benefit. Making people per-plan too much creates frustration and disappointment when those plans cannot be followed. If FastPass+ selections were made around getting a dining reservation people will be annoyed if they miss a FastPass+ return time because the restaurant is short staffed and their meal took longer. Yes, the Cast Member at the attraction will almost certainly honor your FastPass+ but that assumes the guests knows to ask and it still creates frustration.

Attractions also go down and there are plenty of scenarios where it is not Disney’s fault. Again, a point of frustration if your plans are being changed. The further out people commit to plans the more they are attached to those plans and changes create frustration. Less frustration is better for guests and Disney.

 

[lazyboy97o]

What you have to do to get on those attractions (and how much you spend doing so) would dramatically impact guest satisfaction. Sure, total attractions experienced would be a big driver, but it certainly isn't the only factor.

It is the overwhelming driver and it pulls almost everything along with it. It is the by which an entire theme park is designed and built. Increase attractions per guest per hour and you’re going to make it easier to get on attractions, the goal being that people are getting on in 20-30 minutes (and there are reasons Disney stopped advertising FastPass as offering 20 minute or less waits).

 

[Chip Chipperson]

It is still committing to something that was already not actually a constant.

The current system allows Disney to adjust to the current situation instead of what was offered months ago. If an attraction has a part break and can’t open that day or has to open late it just isn’t part of Genie+. You’re not offering a bunch of passes for people to take and strain other attractions as was done with FastPass+. How much is offered can be dialed up and down and managed.

Wouldn't a solution to that be to hold back a certain percentage of LL capacity for each ride to account for that possibility and then release that capacity at some point during the day if there are no operational issues? That's not much different than what they did with FP+ before. If they want to keep the ILL ala carte options, then keep those as they are now - 7 AM for resort guests and park opening for everyone else - so they don't have to worry about issuing too many refunds in the event a ride goes down.

With this plan, they get a more accurate gauge of crowd levels further in advance than they do now, offer a perk to resort guests, and still have some buffer available in the event of operational issues with a ride - and still keep their ILL dollars rolling in, too.

 

[Chi84]

I disagree with the notion that Genie+ alleviates the need for planning. It just moves the planning to day-of and makes you pay for a jarring, possibly frustrating start to each day. It’s going to be interesting to see how this works for my larger group in April.

 

[James Alucobond]

I disagree with the notion that Genie+ alleviates the need for planning. It just moves the planning to day-of and makes you pay for a jarring, possibly frustrating start to each day. It’s going to be interesting to see how this works for my larger group in April.

It doesn't alleviate the need for planning, but it prevents you from being more or less "locked out" of the benefit if you didn't plan three months ago, and it allows cast members to assist you in course correcting or adjusting much more easily on subsequent days of your stay. Previously, there was really nothing anyone could do to help you if everything was already booked up.

 

[flynnibus]

I disagree with the notion that Genie+ alleviates the need for planning. It just moves the planning to day-of and makes you pay for a jarring, possibly frustrating start to each day. It’s going to be interesting to see how this works for my larger group in April.

if there wasn't such contention for availability though, there wouldn't be such planning. Note, the issue isn't with day-of FP, it's with the issue there are far more people then availability. The issue isn't with the concept of not using advanced booking - but all about the matching the system with the park's capacity.

And how do you call it 'planning' if you can only take the limited things offered?

 

[Chi84]

It doesn't alleviate the need for planning, but it prevents you from being more or less "locked out" of the benefit if you didn't plan three months ago, and it allows cast members to assist you in course correcting or adjusting much more easily on subsequent days of your stay. Previously, there was really nothing anyone could do to help you if everything was already booked up.

I suspect Disney held back some slots for guests who didn’t plan (3?) months in advance. We did a few quick turnaround trips in October-November and I was able to get almost everything I wanted, including FOP. SSD was the exception. I understand there were problems with FP+ but I don’t think Genie+ is the answer. Others disagree and that’s fine.

 

[BrianLo]

Now, there's no guarantee one would even get 3....

Asking honestly - has there been park days where every single lightening lane is sold out by 1?

 

[Chip Chipperson]

if there wasn't such contention for availability though, there wouldn't be such planning. Note, the issue isn't with day-of FP, it's with the issue there are far more people then availability. The issue isn't with the concept of not using advanced booking - but all about the matching the system with the park's capacity.

And how do you call it 'planning' if you can only take the limited things offered?

You still need to plan which rides you want to try to get LLs for in an order that makes sense so you don't walk back and forth across the park 3-4 times. Yes, you could just take whatever is available next without any regard for where it's located in the park, but that could lead you from Jungle Cruise to Buzz to Pirates to Peter Pan to Big Thunder. But isn't it better to be able to schedule your rides so you make a loop around the park with time in between to account for an ADR and rides/shows that don't need or use G+?

 

[BrianLo]

FastPass+ disproportionately was advantageous for on site guest, long length of stay guests AND guests who were smart enough to know about how it worked ahead of time. All of which is the heavy demographic skew of this board.

I’m not surprised people are arguing for it back, but know that you are arguing not for parity amongst guests, but something that advantaged you over others.

I think it was a big advantage and it’s not only a financial loss to on site guests to have to pay for it, but massive intrinsic value given up from paying on site premiums. That said, the counter measure with early park entry is actually a measurable new benefit.

 

[Chi84]

FastPass+ disproportionately was advantageous for on site guest, long length of stay guests AND guests who were smart enough to know about how it worked ahead of time. All of which is the heavy demographic skew of this board.

I’m not surprised people are arguing for it back, but know that you are arguing not for parity amongst guests, but something that advantaged you over others.

I think it was a big advantage and it’s not only a financial loss to on site guests to have to pay for it, but massive intrinsic value given up from paying on site premiums. That said, the counter measure with early park entry is actually a measurable new benefit.

I'd be surprised if anyone makes decisions about their WDW vacation with the objective of achieving parity among guests. Maybe I'm part of a pretty selfish lot, but no one ever stresses about vague notions of the common good in our planning sessions.

 

[flynnibus]

You still need to plan which rides you want to try to get LLs for in an order that makes sense so you don't walk back and forth across the park 3-4 times. Yes, you could just take whatever is available next without any regard for where it's located in the park, but that could lead you from Jungle Cruise to Buzz to Pirates to Peter Pan to Big Thunder. But isn't it better to be able to schedule your rides so you make a loop around the park with time in between to account for an ADR and rides/shows that don't need or use G+?

You are confusing 'decisions' with 'planning'. Planning would constitute you laying out a strategy more than one or two steps ahead. If you are picking what to do next.. you would make a decision based on the options you have in front of you and what conditions you have now.

"I'm free, lets see what the wait times are and decide where to go next..."

You don't get to arrange Genie+ or ILL... you either take an offer, or you don't, and retry later. Your DECISION on what to do is going to be based on things like you said about proximity, etc.. but you really don't get to say "well, I'll pick peter pan now, then I'll pick Pirates and Splash together later". You aren't given that kind of control... because the system is geared towards presenting options NOW and steering behavior based on runtime conditions.

But the whole line-skip model goes in the toilet when there is none to offer you in the immediate future.