Lightning Lane at Walt Disney World

[el_super]

2019 at Disneyland. Florida has never even remotely been in the ballpark of sufficient capacity.

That's not really a fair comparison, since they dramatically rose prices to keep the crowds in check.

Which is really what they need to do in Florida.

 

[BrianLo]

That's not really a fair comparison, since they dramatically rose prices to keep the crowds in check.

Which is really what they need to do in Florida.

While I take the point that there will never be so much that even the most popular, newest attraction will have zero waits… Disneyland has and remains a park that one can string together a very, very productive day. Filled with E-tickets and secondary attractions and shows. Any day of the year.

That’s the value of choices and attraction capacity keeping better pace with park capacity.

Florida price increases have kept pace with DLR in lock step. So not sure your excuse is valid. To counteract my point, It was actually more to do with a publicity campaign to stay away.

 

[lazyboy97o]

While I take the point that there will never be so much that even the most popular, newest attraction will have zero waits…

The whole issue of “no waits” is also just a nonsensical strawman. Adequate capacity doesn’t mean no waits. Attractions per guest per hour is an average calculated over an entire day in a park. People more happily tolerate an hour here because they only waited 10 minutes over there.

 

[el_super]

That’s the value of choices and attraction capacity keeping better pace with park capacity.

There's no doubt in my mind, that Disneyland is by and far the better experience. But even Disneyland has Fastpass/MaxPass/Genie+. Hypothetical, for sure, but I would think that most of the local/repeat visitors at Disneyland are far less likely to wait in even the lower waits that Disneyland has over WDW, and only really want to visit attractions with some form of line-skipping enabled.

From everything I have read, Genie+ seems to be working quite well at Disneyland, aside from complaints that there are too many people using it.

Even if the value at Disneyland is greater, they still need to increase costs at WDW in order to curb demand. There are just way too many people coming into the parks for it to be a pleasant experience.

The whole issue of “no waits” is also just a nonsensical strawman. Adequate capacity doesn’t mean no waits. Attractions per guest per hour is an average calculated over an entire day in a park. People more happily tolerate an hour here because they only waited 10 minutes over there.

You still don't really seem to understand the issue though. Even if you added enough capacity to get everything to an average of 30 minutes, people would still want the option to skip the line. That's the product they are selling. That's the product people want.

 

[hsisthebest]

Well they didn't add 6 major rides. There are only 5 rides in the grouping you mentioned (Toy Story Mania already existed), and Alien Swirling Saucers isn't a major ride by any definition (although DHS does need more smaller attractions like it). MMRR also wasn't an addition; it was a replacement that I think has a lower capacity than what it replaced.

Also, DHS had abysmal capacity before they did all of those things. They were an attempt to get it closer to an acceptable level. The starting point matters -- I think DHS had a grand total of 6 rides (Star Tours, Great Movie Ride, Tower of Terror, Rock N Roller Coaster, Toy Story Mania, and the rotting corpse of the Backlot Tour; am I forgetting anything?) before all of the recent construction.

Don't forget Lights Motors Action. Not an E-Ticket, but it would hold upwards of 5K for the better part of an hour.

 

[lazyboy97o]

You still don't really seem to understand the issue though. Even if you added enough capacity to get everything to an average of 30 minutes, people would still want the option to skip the line. That's the product they are selling. That's the product people want.

You are still conflating all sort of different things.

Genie+ is not a skip the line system, it is a virtual queue system. There is a difference in how the two operate and how they impact park operations.

Whether or not there is demand for a virtual queue or a skip the line system is completely separate from the question of base capacity, overall attractions per guest per hour and overall guest satisfaction. Both virtual queue systems and skip the line systems require excess and slack capacity within the park (again, see Volcano Bay which sells Express Pass and had to reduce capacity).

 

[TheGuyThatMakesSwords]

Just my families mantra... "Stand by only" .

 

[UNCgolf]

Don't forget Lights Motors Action. Not an E-Ticket, but it would hold upwards of 5K for the better part of an hour.

I wasn't counting the shows at all -- they were definitely a big help to overall capacity.

 

[LittleBuford]

@lazyboy97o, you’ve said a few times that Tron and Ratatouille were added specifically to address capacity concerns. Is this a hunch on your part or something you know from inside sources?

 

[UNCgolf]

@lazyboy97o, you’ve said a few times that Tron and Ratatouille were added specifically to address capacity concerns. Is this a hunch on your part or something you know from inside sources?

It makes sense from a logical perspective. They're both clones (meaning a quicker build than designing something completely new) and were planned to open pretty quickly before the 50th anniversary. Plus, while they're both relatively new attractions, if they'd always planned to build them at WDW there's no real reason they couldn't have built them sooner.

 

[LittleBuford]

It makes sense from a logical perspective. They're both clones (meaning a quicker build than designing something completely new) and were planned to open pretty quickly before the 50th anniversary. Plus, while they're both relatively new attractions, if they'd always planned to build them at WDW there's no real reason they couldn't have built them sooner.

I follow your logic but am trying to determine whether the claim is an inference or something based on insider knowledge. Needless to say, capacity is always going to factor into the decision to add an attraction, but that’s a different matter from a ride’s very raison d’être being to alleviate crowds.

 

[doctornick]

I follow your logic but am trying to determine whether the claim is an inference or something based on insider knowledge. Needless to say, capacity is always going to factor into the decision to add an attraction, but that’s a different matter from a ride’s very raison d’être being to alleviate crowds.

Yeah, the claim seems a bit specious. If capacity concerns drove the decision, then wouldn't they have built a much higher capacity ride (even if a clone) than Tron? Ratatouille works in that sense because it does have quite good throughput, but I'm under the impression that the main driver was that they felt they needed something in France to enhance the views and they basically chose between Ratatouille or Tokyo's BatB.

But back to Tron, they could have cloned something else that has somewhere above abysmal capacity if that was the driver (off hand, say, Monsters Ride an Go Seek or Indiana Jones in Adventureland) of the green light. Or they would have actually built the Main St theater.

 

[UNCgolf]

Yeah, the claim seems a bit specious. If capacity concerns drove the decision, then wouldn't they have built a much higher capacity ride (even if a clone) than Tron? Ratatouille works in that sense because it does have quite good throughput, but I'm under the impression that the main driver was that they felt they needed something in France to enhance the views and they basically chose between Ratatouille or Tokyo's BatB.

But back to Tron, they could have cloned something else that has somewhere above abysmal capacity if that was the driver (off hand, say, Monsters Ride an Go Seek or Indiana Jones in Adventureland) of the green light. Or they would have actually built the Main St theater.

If you factor in cost, though, TRON makes more sense. I think adding to Adventureland would have been a bigger/more costly undertaking than dropping TRON into that gap in Tomorrowland -- there's an expansion pad available, but it at least looks like accessing that pad and making it guest ready would have required significantly more logistical work -- and the Main Street theater would have much higher operational costs involved with paying equity actors for multiple shows a day.

 

[Casper Gutman]

If you factor in cost, though, TRON makes more sense. I think adding to Adventureland would have been a bigger/more costly undertaking than dropping TRON into that gap in Tomorrowland -- there's an expansion pad available, but it at least looks like accessing that pad and making it guest ready would have required significantly more logistical work -- and the Main Street theater would have much higher operational costs involved with paying equity actors for multiple shows a day.

And, of course, WDW already has Indy, down to the track layout, over in Dinoland. Tron is a screen-based coaster - I suspect it's less pricy then more AA heavy alternatives.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yeah, the claim seems a bit specious. If capacity concerns drove the decision, then wouldn't they have built a much higher capacity ride (even if a clone) than Tron? Ratatouille works in that sense because it does have quite good throughput, but I'm under the impression that the main driver was that they felt they needed something in France to enhance the views and they basically chose between Ratatouille or Tokyo's BatB.

But back to Tron, they could have cloned something else that has somewhere above abysmal capacity if that was the driver (off hand, say, Monsters Ride an Go Seek or Indiana Jones in Adventureland) of the green light. Or they would have actually built the Main St theater.

The longer you wait the more expensive a clone becomes. Codes change, internal design standards change, operations change, even guest expectations change. While plenty of people still think a wheelchair can get them “front of the line” access it would be a lot more shocking if Disney in the 2020s opened an attraction without an accessible queue. Nothing is perfect and lessons are learned. The reason Transformers: The Ride – 3D at Universal Studios Florida was able to go from decision to opening in 13 months is because Universal’s senior leadership made the extraordinary decision to truly replicate the ride and apply lessons learned in Singapore and Hollywood after the fact. It allowed for an incredible pace but it was also somewhat backwards, if you know you have a problem you fix it not replicate it. TRON and Ratatouille are not just clones, they’re “lifts” because as much as possible Disney was trying to do the same thing, “lift” the attractions from Shanghai and Paris and drop them in Orlando.

(See Page 6 for phases of design). Cloning recent projects like TRON and Ratatouille at best get you most of the way through schematic design (about 20 - 25% of design). The more time it’s been the more you skip back towards concept. The newest version of the Indiana Jones Adventure at Tokyo DisneySEA is now over 20 years old. Even using Dinosaur (since it exists in Florida) as a basis means changes, as there actually are small differences in the ride layout which impact show set design. But it’s not just the physical facility. While not consumer technology, ride and show control technology has evolved over the past 20 years. The EMV is also a proprietary vehicle that hasn’t been built in 20 years, so you’d have to bring that design up to contemporary standards and then get someone to do all of the custom work to build these customs vehicles with their new custom controls. Disney isn’t going to buy Intamin’s imitation EMV. TRON on the other hand is a Vekoma motorbike coaster that Vekoma currently manufactures. Those parts are essentially available. Ratatouille is also a proprietary vehicle design but it’s more recent with more recent iterations (Rise of the Resistance and Mickey and Minnie’s Runaway Railway) as well. The EMV just hasn’t been done in 20 years.

Monsters Inc: Ride & Go Seek isn’t as old but it has two different issues. The relationship with the Oriental Land Company had fallen because it was felt that Disney used them to finance research and development by requiring them to spend more. It wouldn’t make sense to literally do just that and use an attraction the Oriental Land Company paid to develop as your quick and cheap addition right when you are trying to rebuild that relationship and get them spending again. Then there is the Catch 22 of marketing (I’ll get back to this) where a less interactive tracked dark ride next to an older interactive tracked dark ride immediately following three trackless dark rides isn’t going to look that good, especially when it’s opening coincides with the big 50th celebration. These four rides would have all opened in the span of 3 - 4 years, one right after the other. (And yes, I’m aware that Tokyo Disneyland has Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters in the same land as Monsters Inc)

The Catch 22 of marketing is what really killed the theater and anything else that might really help capacity. Disney’s costs are so out of control that they can’t afford to just add something. They have to make things worse and induce some demand in order to justify the insane costs. What once bought Expedition Everest now can’t even buy Pixar Pier. A roller coaster is an easy sell that shows up on surveys, a theater with an indeterminate show is not. The Main Street Theater also still needed a lot work. Just look at the “art” that was released, it’s a very rough digital model. They didn’t even bother to have someone repaint it.

TRON was also originally pitched as a Magic Kingdom co-development project. The seeds were already there. That you had to go so far back to think of other things to clone demonstrates the limited options. The only other attraction developed in the past decade or so that doesn’t have an analogue at Walt Disney World are Mystic Manor and Pirates of the Caribbean: Battle for the Sunken Treasure. The Hong Kongers are protective of their uniqueness, so it doesn’t seem wise to clone Toy Story Play Land in Shanghai, imitate Toy Story Play Land in Orlando and clone Mystic Manor all at the same time. Battle for the Sunken Treasure is very expensive and having to rides named Pirates of the Caribbean right next to each other seems doubtful.

Ratatouille’s placement was heavily influenced by the Skyliner but it also wasn’t a big enough issue to justify more costly additions to the project. Going the route of co-developing Beauty and the Beast would have blocked some views but it was the less assured one in terms of cost.

 

[TikibirdLand]

Yeah, the claim seems a bit specious. If capacity concerns drove the decision, then wouldn't they have built a much higher capacity ride (even if a clone) than Tron? Ratatouille works in that sense because it does have quite good throughput, but I'm under the impression that the main driver was that they felt they needed something in France to enhance the views and they basically chose between Ratatouille or Tokyo's BatB.

You mean we could have had BatB instead of Rat? That would have been way cool! Wow! what a big mistake!

 

[HauntedPirate]

My god… There is ZERO chance Disney raises prices to a level that would truly “have fewer people into the parks paying more”. The parks are a corporate cash cow. They would have to double prices on everything - Everything - to reduce attendance meaningfully yet maintain the high margins the corporation relies on to keep shareholders happy.

ETA: Not to mention the massive, negative PR nightmare they would create in doing that.

 

[TikibirdLand]

My god… There is ZERO chance Disney raises prices to a level that would truly “have fewer people into the parks paying more”. The parks are a corporate cash cow. They would have to double prices on everything - Everything - to reduce attendance meaningfully yet maintain the high margins the corporation relies on to keep shareholders happy.

Well, if they did, I could finally justify going to Discovery Cove. Every time I bring it up, my DW says, "It's too expensive". Now, I could say, "Well, compared to WDW...".

 

[ImperfectPixie]

My god… There is ZERO chance Disney raises prices to a level that would truly “have fewer people into the parks paying more”. The parks are a corporate cash cow. They would have to double prices on everything - Everything - to reduce attendance meaningfully yet maintain the high margins the corporation relies on to keep shareholders happy.

This is the big problem. The BoD and executives are demanding quarter over quarter increases from the parks as if they're selling something that has unlimited capacity and no price tipping point. It WILL get to a point where enough people don't see value in vacationing at the resorts anymore - whether it be due to overcrowding, lack of quality/service or price hikes - and Disney will end up scrambling to fix the shortsightedness that got them here.

EDIT: With Chapek at the helm, I have a feeling that this may happen sooner, rather than later because he's trying to use the same principles he used in merchandising on the parks. The problem is that the "window dressing" that works with merchandising and product images doesn't work with real-world experiences...the flaws become readily apparent in the real world.

 

[Basil of Baker Street]

My god… There is ZERO chance Disney raises prices to a level that would truly “have fewer people into the parks paying more”. The parks are a corporate cash cow. They would have to double prices on everything - Everything - to reduce attendance meaningfully yet maintain the high margins the corporation relies on to keep shareholders happy.

ETA: Not to mention the massive, negative PR nightmare they would create in doing that.

Yep. Too many beds to fill and tables to sit at eat. Disney wants bodies.