My Magic + details ...

[Clancy Wiggum]

I have only heard that Disney is trying to discourage park hopping by only letting you schedule FP at one park per day. If they get rid of park hopping altogether, I think that would really backfire for Disney....

I'm don't think there is any hidden meaning to the one park per day limitation in the current system. It seems more likely to me that limitation is just misreading how customers would use FP+ or trying to get the basic system running and proven before expanding it to multiple parks per day.

There are better ways to begin discouraging park hopping, like not making it such an inexpensive add in to a MYW ticket or stopping bus/monorail transportation from park to park. When those things change, I'll start to worry. Until then, I'll politely mention to any CM that will listen that FP+ should not be limited to one park per day.

 

[doctornick]

If FP+ implementation is poorly received, as suggested earlier, I would think WDW would seek to address some of the complaints. It seems unlikely they would just write off the investment and abandon the project. There is little chance they won't understand that everything is not hunky dory. They will have analytical data and someone, uh, analyzing it.

I think if large number of guests do not end up scheduling FP+, that Disney will automatically assign FP+ to everyone a week or 1-2 days before their reservations. Then, upon check in, they give the people the the list of pre-generated FP+ (presumable given ones that would help to "spread out crowds" if used) under the idea that guests who be like "cool, front of the line passes for free". Might even make a small dent in keeping people from going off property -- "we already have passes for Little Mermaid on Friday, we should go to the Magic Kingdom that day instead of Universal".

Of course, this works best if they have some idea as to what park the guests are planning to go on each day (e.g. dining reservations); otherwise, it is just a random itinerary.

 

[ParentsOf4]

I'm don't think there is any hidden meaning to the one park per day limitation in the current system. It seems more likely to me that limitation is just misreading how customers would use FP+ or trying to get the basic system running and proven before expanding it to multiple parks per day.

There are better ways to begin discouraging park hopping, like not making it such an inexpensive add in to a MYW ticket or stopping bus/monorail transportation from park to park. When those things change, I'll start to worry. Until then, I'll politely mention to any CM that will listen that FP+ should not be limited to one park per day.

Park hopping already is an expensive option. For example, a 4-day ticket without hopper is $279, with hopper it's $338. That's a 21% difference.

The problem WDW is facing is DHS and DAK are being treated like half-day parks by most guests, while the Monorail encourages park hopping between Epcot and MK. Inevitably, guests spend the second half of the day at MK, making it disproportionally crowded in the evening.

Ideally, WDW would like guests to slow down and appreciate all DAK and DHS have to offer. What Disney doesn't seem to understand (or chooses to ignore) is that their prices encourage a "go-go" attitude as guests run around trying to maximum value for what has become an expensive theme park vacation.

 

[Did Knee]

What Disney doesn't seem to understand (or chooses to ignore) is that their prices encourage a "go-go" attitude as guests run around trying to maximum value for what has become an expensive theme park vacation.

I would argue that they have created that "go-go" attitude on purpose. I would bet they have looked at the "dollar throughput" of guests and figured out that they can get more money out of more guests by getting people to race on through.

 

[flynnibus]

I would argue that they have created that "go-go" attitude on purpose. I would bet they have looked at the "dollar throughput" of guests and figured out that they can get more money out of more guests by getting people to race on through.

The problem with 'go go go' is you need 'more more more' to keep people occupied. Plus, you get less and less out of each investment if people blow through them.

I doubt making commandos out of people is Disney's intention.. I just think they've created a monster without knowing it.

 

[gwhb75]

You really don't know, do you?

A number of CMs who work the "merge point" between FastPass and Standby lines have reported that the ratio gets as high as 10-to-1 for some of the popular, low capacity attractions.

There's a reason attractions such as Soarin' and Toy Story Mania frequently have 2-hour waits even when the parks are not particularly crowded.

It's why I'm now of the opinion that WDW would be a better place if they completely eliminated FP/FP+.

Agreed that I don't know, that's why I said it was just my thoughts. I don't think you can blame FP for the 2 hour stand-by waits on some rides (especially low capacity, non-omnimover rides like Soarin'). It would be part of the reason, but not the only one.

 

[righttrack]

I wanted to see if there were some opinions on how FP+ will affect touring plans. I probably will have to wait for next year's "Unofficial Guide" to really get a grip on the methodology for minimizing wait times with this.

I'll definitely post quite a bit about it once our trip starts in a few days. I'd say that the opportunist in me wants to go for later afternoons/evenings when fastpasses are normally gone and I'm close to a sit down dinner at or near a park. You can work from where you dinner is, and make the arrangements for the second park visit later that day. Mornings perhaps we'll do the traditional way. Still, if you want to sleep in and still get on Soarin' and Test Track, you can. That's the real benefit

 

[dadddio]

Gosh, I hope not. Not if all the limitations discussed here are true. I'll be very sad. No, upset.

That is a very, very big 'if'.

 

[KingStefan]

I have to admit that the inability to use FP+ in multiple parks is proving to be a pain for planing our trip in two weeks....

Going to a theme park shouldn't be this stressful.

Here, here!

 

[dadddio]

All who are staying at the resorts are chosen to do the test no matter what, it's not like before where the test was invite only (to my knowledge).

To better state what I said: of those who are active in the test, 30% thus far have opted to do anything with FP+ prior to arrival...that's a very, very bad indicator.

I'm not sure that that is a bad indicator, at all. In fact, it seems to coincide pretty directly with the company's stated expectation of utilization. Further, it should make the rest of us feel better about the possibility of same-day FPs and FPs being available for 'good' rides at the last minute.

 

[stevehousse]

It's not that hard to plan. Rope drop at a park and do as many rides as you need to, then park hop in the afternoon and have your FP reservations for the late afternoon-early evening when the lines are longer...pretty simple...

 

[dadddio]

Other things I wanted to mention:

1) The MagicBands are being harshly received by convention/business guests, seen as something pointless when all what they want to do mostly is check-in, grab their room key and keep going. I know they're not the main target demographic but still, it's something to keep in mind when WDW plays host to many business/convention-type events throughout the year.

I would think that this kind of guest would simply opt for the RFID card instead of the band.

2) There are many who apparently received invites but deleted the email/threw the letter out, treating it as like some sort of special offer thing or a "Wait, there's more!" type of deal.

3) There's a large chunk whom DID sign up and even after they customized their MagicBand colors, profiles, etc, they never bothered to read what it actually does or any of the features the MagicBands do.

4) And lastly, people who signed up for the test but somehow skipped the part about the MagicBand entirely, prompting many on arrival to look at it and have a "What the flip?" type of reaction.

People, in general, are dumb and they don't actually read correspondence. MM+ didn't promise to make anyone smarter.

 

[KingStefan]

I'm not blaming the planners. Be happy; FP+ was designed for you!

...

WDW would be a much better place if all FP/FP+ lines were eliminated.

...

FP+ was *not* designed for the planners. That may have been the intention, but they failed miserably. Just read these boards to confirm.

I remember WDW before FP - it was *not* a much better place. Literally spending most of your vacation on line was *not* better. Even with limited A-E ticketing, lines were miserable. No, we've been there, and I don't want to go back!

 

[KingStefan]

If FP+ implementation is poorly received, as suggested earlier, I would think WDW would seek to address some of the complaints. It seems unlikely they would just write off the investment and abandon the project. There is little chance they won't understand that everything is not hunky dory. They will have analytical data and someone, uh, analyzing it.
...

Ordinarily I'd agree with you here. However, I would have thought that there was little chance that it would be this poorly conceived at the outset. All it would take is some middle manager with his head in the wrong place trying to CYA to "explain" why it is not ill-conceived, just needs some tweaking, time for patrons to adjust, etc. and I think based on how it's been handled so far that it is *very* likely that they won't understand that everything is not hunky dory. Then they'll stick their head in the sand and futz with it until there is search for the guilty, punishment of the innocent, and praise and honors for the non-participants, and finally, one hopes, it will be fixed (or completely redone).

...
It might be a bit more difficult to emulate the current FP system within the framework of FP+ but it would be doable in time. By emulating the current FP, I mean anonymously without a Disney account and using ticket media on the day of. Maybe adding to onsite kiosks a means of activating the ride selection screen via RFID chip without entering an account/password. If they could get that done, it would actually be better than the current system because you wouldn't have the stampede for the specific ride FP machines and you could select a return time, instead of accepting the current time window....

Emulating the current FP system would be *FABULOUS* IMHO. With a few enhancements. Allow 2 FP+ in advance for popular attractions. Allow them to be at any park. When it is within a certain time of the second, say 15 minutes before the start window, allow a third, etc., so that you never have more than two, with one time approaching soon. That's pretty much the way it works now with paper tickets issued at the ride entrance; it would just be more automated.

Enhancement: Allow as many FPs as you want as far in advance as you want for less popular attractions, the stereotypical example being Maelstrom.

I agree that the technology is great, and the phone interface a great idea, the RFID, tremendous, all great. But the way they've restricted the FP is really, really not well thought out.

And what about something for people who aren't so tech savvy or don't have a phone or choose not to bring one to the parks, like the ability to use RFID kiosks to make FP+ res and getting a little ticket to help them remember when to go?

...

I do like the basic idea they are working here. But like many others, I think the parameters of implementation are a little off. Since this is a tech-based system, it can be re-configured on the fly, in some ways more easily than others. I'm willing to wait for a year or so after it actually kicks off to start grumbling, or considering alternatives with my vacation time and money.

OK, you say a little off, I say way, way off. But I agree that the basic idea and the technology is sound.
Maybe your're willing to wait a year or so, but I'm going in Dec, at Christmas, during the busiest time of year, when planning and FP is to me, critical, to make the trip most enjoyable. I don't want this system to be a complete pig's breakfast when I'm spending more than twice as much to go than other times.

 

[ddrongowski]

No one knows for sure. They are still testing.

Like the yeti, MM+ will be broken forever......

 

[ddrongowski]

So when will MyMagic+ be officially up and running, you know with wristbands and reservations and everything?

Like the yeti, MM+ will be broken forever......

 

[ddrongowski]

Wristbands are waterproof ... a helpful drunk cougar told me they even work in the
hot tub.

What was the cougar scanning in the hot tub or was that the buzzing type of wristband? Did I really just type that?

 

[KingStefan]

You really don't know, do you?

A number of CMs who work the "merge point" between FastPass and Standby lines have reported that the ratio gets as high as 10-to-1 for some of the popular, low capacity attractions.

There's a reason attractions such as Soarin' and Toy Story Mania frequently have 2-hour waits even when the parks are not particularly crowded.

It's why I'm now of the opinion that WDW would be a better place if they completely eliminated FP/FP+.

A ratio being 10/1 has nothing to do with the percent of ride capacity taken up by FP. They are two *entirely*s, different things. Plus, that's a kind of obnoxious response "your really don't know, do you".

You are confusing ride capacity and demand. Let's say a ride has a capacity of 2,000/hr. If you give out half the capacity FP (1,000) per hour, that leaves half for standby. If in the first hour, 2,000 standby riders show up, then you have a 1-hr wait.

Normally, you'd expect a FP wait time to be about 0 (that's the whole idea, isn't it), but if everyone shows up right at the beginning of a window, there will be some irregularity. In the example above, there will be no riders waiting on the FP line, and 1,000 riders on standby. Technically that's a ratio of infinity, but say for the sake of argument that a lot of FP riders show up at once and there are 50 on line. That's a ratio of 20-to-1 on line. But still only 50% of the ride's capacity have been reserved for FP.

If the real demand for the ride is 3,000 riders that hour (as it is in the example above - 1,000 for FP riders, and 2,000 arriving as standby), and there is no FP, then 2,000 riders will be serviced the first hour, and 1,000 will be left on line - the same as if there were FP.

One could argue that not having FP would reduce the demand, and therefore the line would be shorter. That's true. So let's suppose that the lack of FP reduces the demand from 3,000 to 2,500, then you have 1/2 hour wait at the end of the hour, and 500 riders who were so unhappy with the wait times that they didn't get to ride at all. I don't see how this improves the situation.

No matter how you cut it up, FP=good, and lack of FP does *not* reduce wait times, except if you consider riders who gave up in frustration.

 

[KingStefan]

can someone explain what the "ride strategy" would be using this new system? In the past I would do stuff like grab a FP for big thunder and ride Splash, or at DS I would grab a FP for RNR coaster and ride TOT. I understand that wont be possible anymore, but what is the strategy to use to minimize wait times when using this new system?

The park hopping strategy with the FP+ system would be to tour the first park immediately after opening before the lines get too long using the Standby lines. Lines typically are shortest for the first hour or two after opening. Then, hop over to the second park in the afternoon, if you have later FP+ selections for that park.

For example, be at DHS for rope drop, use the Standby lines for TSM, RnRC, TOT, and STII. Depending on your pace, you could be done with these by 11 AM. (I've done them even faster.) If you want, then watch one of the DHS shows (which handle lots of people), perhaps have lunch, and then hop over to Epcot where, hopefully, you have afternoon or early evening FP+ selections for either TT or Soarin'.

The key is to be able to get "good" FP+ return times for popular attractions.

Note that I use "good" in quotes because different people will have different definitions of what constitutes "good" FP+ experience return windows. Like FP, it appears FP+ will provide guests with a return window of about 1 hour.

If you are not park hopping, then get FP+ return times when lines are the longest, typically in the afternoon.

Always get FP+ selections for attractions with the traditionally longest wait times that you intend to ride (e.g. Space Mountain). Don't waste a FP+ selection on your "favorite" attraction if it traditionally has a short wait.

These seem like excellent strategies. I'm going to be curious to see how various strategies play out in reality. We won't really know until things are in full-swing and people try different things out.

I wonder what Touringplans will recommend. I haven't visited over there for a while, so maybe I should to check out what they have to say. If Len is on the boards and sees this, perhaps he could chime in.

 

[KingStefan]

I'm don't think there is any hidden meaning to the one park per day limitation in the current system. It seems more likely to me that limitation is just misreading how customers would use FP+ or trying to get the basic system running and proven before expanding it to multiple parks per day.

...

I really *really* hope you are right there.