ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
^^^THIS^^^
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
MM+ Why we can't have nice things.
- Thread starter asianway
- Start date
^^^THIS^^^
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Yes I was there - If you did not like the Coaster the Tortilla factory was the most interesting thing there!
doctornick
Well-Known Member
The counter point is -- and I think its valid -- that DAK and DHS are heped emmensely due to cheaper additional days on MYW tickets and being in the same resort as the most visited theme park in the world and a vacation destination where people often focus solely on theme parks. IOW, DCA's issues were less about what the park featured and a good bit about its location in the greater LA area. Many visitors to DL simply ignored DCA altogether or spent far less time there than they did DL proper. This was expecially true with APs who are a far larger percentage of the guests at DLR compared to WDW.
I think if DCA 1.0 was build in WDW instead of, say, DHS it would have gotten just as much attendance as DHS has -- maybe even more. Sure, people would have hated Superstar Limo regardless, but at least DCA at opening had more rides that either DHS or DAK currently have.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
FP+ doesn't add ride capacity.
Whether it's FP or FP+, several of WDW's theme parks have capacity problems. They simply don't have enough good rides.
FP+ is an advantage for you because you were able to reserve your TSM FP+ in advance.
For someone who could not book in advance, FP+ is a big minus. They'd rather have the FP dash.
Again, FP+ did not change TSM's capacity.
If someone gains as a result FP+, then someone loses as a result of FP+.
FP+ is a net-zero.
Disney spent a lot of cash just so, as a whole, we guests gain very little.
Well, it's been written (elsewhere, not here since you're obviously concerned) that the location of the gates at DL would make it difficult to fully monitor everyone entering wearing bands. DLP is still well in the hole financially, TDR doesn't need to enhance the guest experience, and the Chinese parks had one that just expanded, and another still being built, albeit in some of the most unhealthy smog on the planet.
And if you're so concerned about what's written on this forum, what possible incentive could you have to remain?
Voxel
President of Progress City
Agreed, for the most part. WDW has the advantage there. Disneyland for many was and still is a weekend/day thing where you drive down and take your kids too.
Disneyland is quiet "violent" against change. They hated FP when it was initiated and the down side to the usage of MB technology at Disneyland is that it is a 1 to 2 day parks. People don't stay long so there is no reliance on the resort and payment system like WDW could create. As I have stated previous. The 7 day Cruises would have been the best testing ground for many of the basic functionality such as payment, room, dinining, etc. Then when ported to park systems all they would have had to do is FastPass..
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Would they have a choice? I've said this earlier in this thread, but it bears repeating... MM+ is a Burbank initiate, developed by the heads of the P&R arm of the company. It isn't something that TDO came up with and asked for. Sure, maybe TDO was more open -- or even eager -- to being the guinea pig for the system, but from the start this was a system intended to be rolled out accoss multiple Disney.
I'm very confident that we will see at least some aspects of MM+ appear at other divisions, like the cruise line and DLR and DLP in the near future, once it is felt that "testing" at WDW has solved most problems. Perhaps not to the same extent that we see at WDW, but I think it is naive to think that MM+ will never be rolled out anywhere else -- especially given the size of the investment by Disney.
Dude, that just shows their concrete is too thin.patience grasshopper....they have a lot more concrete to cover than Uni, Sea World, Legoland, and Fun Spot combined
Until I see standby lines reduced for the majority of guests I fail to see how FP+ improves the majority of visitors trips.
Offering an "improvement" to a minority with the prerequisite of planning and booking well in advance of a visit is not an improvement in my book.
I've said it before. The average visitor doesn't even know what a Splash Mountain is three months before visiting let alone that they need to book something called a Fastpass weeks before visiting.
Recon443
Active Member
You stated the parks wouldn't want the system. Your reply offers speculative rationale, but not a definitive nix to the system by any other Disney park.
I stated the system could be installed at any park and clearly it can.
Your last sentence makes no sense. If I am concerned then I would want to remain. If I am not concerned then it would follow that I have no incentive to remain.
Yes, they have a choice. DL may implement FP+, but they don't have the hotel space to make the bands a necessity. Again, DLP probably can't afford to buy into the program, OLC doesn't have to, and neither do the Chinese parks.
WDWDad13
Well-Known Member
FP+ isn't built to reduce standby lines anymore than the old FP system was designed to reduce standby lines
with that being said... do we stick with old school technology and paper FP tickets along with carrying around park tickets, room keys, credit cards, photopass cards, etc. or combine all into 1 with new technology?
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Indeed. I think there would be far more resistence -- and people being outspoken about it -- to MM+ and MBs at DLR than there has been at WDW. That said, I'm still sure we'll see some aspects come to DLR. If nothing else, I think we will see MBs introduced to the resort hotel guests out there and aybe being offered to "good neighbor" hotel guests as well.
I don't know if FP+ will ever be used, but I could see it added to a few of the E-tickets there as a "perk" for onsight guests to use while the majority of people continue with paper FP. This might help with increasing occupancy rates and increasing room prices on property since there isn't a lot of benefits that differentiate the on site hotels and nearby hotels at DLR.
Recon443
Active Member
Exactly. The decision is not the parks, it is a Burbank decision.
Or they could have spent a twentieth of NextGen and built another headline attraction next to TSMM.
Or less than that if they budgeted and allocated funds better.
WDWDad13
Well-Known Member
So what's the problem then? They don't have to book a FP+ in advance anymore than they have to get a paper fastpass onsite. People will still go and enjoy the parks... they just have more options now.
Actually, it clearly can't, for the reasons I gave. Save of course for your own speculative rationale....
Makes perfect sense to the rest of us, unsurprising as it is.....
WDWDad13
Well-Known Member
that comparison is moot since we have no idea if they would have used a single dollar budgeted for NGE into any new attraction
And that's just a ringing endorsement for NGE....
NGE has directly impacted parks and resorts budget. Ask anyone who really knows.
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
Since I let my AP expire in 2010 because of the lack of new attractions or fresh entertainment, this new program does nothing to entice me to travel the 12 miles back to WDW.
In my view, this is a very expensive fix to a problem that didn't exist and does nothing to address the actual issues facing the resort as a whole.
In my view, this is a very expensive fix to a problem that didn't exist and does nothing to address the actual issues facing the resort as a whole.