-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
My Magic + details ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
My assumption is based on FP- will get about 80% of the available capacity for the headliners, So those in the standby lines will have even longer waits than today. Longest Disney line I have ever waited in was the Subs at DL when they first reopened and that was 3.5 Hours
It will be interesting to see what the equilibrium point is for the new standby lines. I expect them to be much longer by design in order to force people to shop and eat instead of utilize the attractions.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Really, Considering that anyone outside of the CONUS cannot use MDE in any form I anticipate a LOT of foreign visitors will be locked out of the new system until they arrive stateside, at which point all prime FP- and times will be taken.
Disney's going to need a LOT of lipstick for this pig.
unkadug
Follower of "Saget"The Cult
They recently purchased a large block of lipstick stock. Check the lipstick futures...they are through the roof...
BUY BUY BUY
AdventureHasAName
Well-Known Member
I think it will be far, far less than 80%. FP+ is a very different animal from FP. The biggest difference, as I see it, is the massive amount of FP+s that will go unused because families decided to go to a different park or because they booked FP+s for attractions that, for whatever reason, happened to have almost no line when they actually got to the park; these are two issues that don't happen with current FP system. I'd be willing to bet that less than 30% of all FP+s booked at home will ever actually be used in the parks.
stevehousse
Well-Known Member
But if they don't end up using it they can swap it for a different ride!
AdventureHasAName
Well-Known Member
Two thoughts ...
1. Not if the attractions are completely booked for the day (think about the current ADR system), and
2. Not if they can't figure out how to swap the FP+ while inside the parks.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
You are making the assumption that the swap will be allowed, If FP- is seen what it truly is ie a attraction load leveler and CM planning tool. Having FP slots 'expire' in a unused state is a 'good' thing from a systems point of view in that it translates to less resource use.
kittybubbles
Active Member
I get what you are saying, but I also assume Disney understands this as well. Airlines overbook flights to ensure they fill seats and sometimes folks get bumped off flights.
I am just trying to understand how any of this will work at a park like DHS. I assume anyone knowing they will be in that park will want a FP booked for TSMM. I assume Disney is not going to want to deny folks a reservation during their trip (for fear they will skip the park all together) so I feel they may be willing to overbook the ride's capacity knowing a percentage won't make their ride time. The trick for WDW will be learning the correct percentage to overbook by.
For other rides, I think they will need no shows and such for when a ride goes down.
I guess time will tell, but I can't help but feel headline attractions are going to be a tough balancing act for WDW.
I had a similar experience, but I tracked down the problem as being my fault, not Disney's.
I had not realized that I had two Disney accounts. When I made my reservations, I had used an account that was tied to one email address, but when I tried to cancel the reservation, I was signed in to their website using a different email address and it gave me the 'reservation can only be cancelled by Steven' message.
I signed on using the other email address and was able to cancel the reservation easily.
I wonder if the suggested responses weren't driven by your answers to the earlier questions.
I think that people like you who do not typically make ADRs are going to have the hardest time with prereserving FPs. Those people who make a number of ADRs have already planned out their basic touring strategy at 120 days. Once that was done, it becomes super simple to select FPs 60 days prior.
The way I look at it, it's generally a crap shoot to get FPs at a park that you hop to in the afternoon. As such, I don't really see it as a big deal to not be able to prereserve FPs for that second park. That being said, one possible solution is to hit DHS early and ride the big rides before the lines get too long. Then use your FPs at the second park.
No one really knows. You might have teh option to pull same-day FPs in the park that you are in. You might not.
If you are visiting during the current test, you would simply use your KTTW card to pull paper FPs. You need not put away your MB to do so.
The line reducing effect caused by a person only being able to get one FP for it per day will also tend to reduce that ride's wait time. This may be a fairly small effect, but I'm not seeing how FP+ could cause that particular ride's SB wait time to actually increase.
How would that work?
If FPs go unused, it doesn't mean that the resources weren't used as people still queued up for the ride. In fact, FPs going unused would mean that their load leveling/CM planning did not work as efficiently as planned. In other words, somewhere, wait times were unnecessarily long (and CMs were super busy) while somewhere else some ride vehicles might be underfilled (and CMs were underworked).
From a pure load leveling/CM utilization standpoint, the best scenario would be to do away with the SB lines and schedule everyone's rides.
I believe that as long as they post accurate wait times, that they are pretty safe scheduling a high percentage of FPs. 'No shows' will be filled by the SB line and the SB line shouldn't get too unreasonably long simply because people are unlikely to wait for a long time in it IF they were able to ride the ride via a quick FP line.
I like the airline analogy because when you fly stand by on an airline, you realize that you are 'standing by' for the flight and that other people have priority. Park visitors need to move away from the idea that stand by lines are the primary lines. They are by very definition subordinate to the FP lines and that is how it should be.
KingStefan
Well-Known Member
Some time ago, in order to pull a paper FP, you had to use a credential that you used to enter the park. If you tried, for example, to send someone to a park to pull FPs for late-sleepers who did not enter the park it would not work - or so you were told at guest services - I've never actually tried.
I've been told recently that pulling FPs for people not presently in the park with their ticket (or KTTW) works. Is that true? Can you do that?
Also, if you have your ticket on your MB and use it to enter a park, can you still use your paper ticket to pull FPs? Or will the system prevent that?
I've been told recently that pulling FPs for people not presently in the park with their ticket (or KTTW) works. Is that true? Can you do that?
Also, if you have your ticket on your MB and use it to enter a park, can you still use your paper ticket to pull FPs? Or will the system prevent that?
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Correct - and the experience would be like living in the old Soviet Union, Or the soon to come United Socialist States of Amerika
KingStefan
Well-Known Member
Regarding the standby line wait time discussion:
Queuing theory tells us that if demand stays constant, that FPs will NOT increase wait times. Period.
Now, of course, demand does not stay constant for several reasons. Demand goes up with FP for various reasons. Two that I can think of are: (1) with constant demand, FP will make standby shorter, so therefore people with lower wait time tolerance will be willing to standby; (2) FP allows you to occupy a place in two queuing systems at once.
In any case, there are many more factors affecting standby waits other than FP. Like what other attractions are available, and whether the ride has been recently updated, etc.
Anyway, there will always be those who cite counter examples as evidence, but in every case I've found that I have heard about, either cause and effect have been confused [basic principal to remember in statistics: CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION!] or data has been faulty.
For example, some number of years ago, HM had FP. Demand fell for the ride significantly over time, because it was not updated, and there were new attractions that attracted guests away from HM. So Disney discontinues FP on HM because it was not needed and a waste of resources (requires machine maintenance, and CMs to assist with both pulling and returns). So many FP detractors jumped on the band wagon with "see, they took away FP from HM, and now there are no standby lines". That is a confusion of cause and effect. They took away FP *because* there were no standby lines, not the other way around.
Also, this part is pure speculation, but I believe there is at least a small psychological effect that FP has on demand in that it makes guests think it must be a better ride somehow, because it has FP, and therefore increases their desire subconsciously to ride. Just speculating.
Queuing theory tells us that if demand stays constant, that FPs will NOT increase wait times. Period.
Now, of course, demand does not stay constant for several reasons. Demand goes up with FP for various reasons. Two that I can think of are: (1) with constant demand, FP will make standby shorter, so therefore people with lower wait time tolerance will be willing to standby; (2) FP allows you to occupy a place in two queuing systems at once.
In any case, there are many more factors affecting standby waits other than FP. Like what other attractions are available, and whether the ride has been recently updated, etc.
Anyway, there will always be those who cite counter examples as evidence, but in every case I've found that I have heard about, either cause and effect have been confused [basic principal to remember in statistics: CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION!] or data has been faulty.
For example, some number of years ago, HM had FP. Demand fell for the ride significantly over time, because it was not updated, and there were new attractions that attracted guests away from HM. So Disney discontinues FP on HM because it was not needed and a waste of resources (requires machine maintenance, and CMs to assist with both pulling and returns). So many FP detractors jumped on the band wagon with "see, they took away FP from HM, and now there are no standby lines". That is a confusion of cause and effect. They took away FP *because* there were no standby lines, not the other way around.
Also, this part is pure speculation, but I believe there is at least a small psychological effect that FP has on demand in that it makes guests think it must be a better ride somehow, because it has FP, and therefore increases their desire subconsciously to ride. Just speculating.
Buried20KLeague
Well-Known Member
What?
Your whole premise is flawed from the start, because it claims FP wasn't needed at HM because it wasn't popular. That's flat out wrong. It wasn't needed because of the throughput of the attraction, and was a cost that wasn't necessary because of that. It had nothing to do with demand. You're really going to tell me you think HM isn't one of the most popular rides at the MK? Others with more knowledge on the matter than I could confirm, but I'm willing to bet HM has some of the highest rider counts per day.
Short standby lines doesn't have to mean lack of interest... Sometimes it just means the attraction is functioning as designed, and not bogged down by a bolt-on system designed after the fact.
Talk about confusion of cause and effect.
I'm thinking that you misread or ignored my point.
While teh SB line might be shorter, it would move more slowly becase the FP guests have a higher priority.
What really determines whether those 'low time tolerance' people get in line is the posted wait time. This wait time will tend to decrease slightly as FP is increased because the 'only one FP ride per ride per day' rule will tend to limit the number of times FP users will reride a specific ride.