New Return Procedure at Soarin'

[flynnibus]

People keep calling it FP is just flat out wrong and is just inflammatory.

FP is more about shifting demand by dispursing a percentage of it. This model is about overflow. Push excess demand into the future.

Where this is so different in queueing theory is it tries to siphon off EXCESS demand. The consequence though is by deferring those queue entries... if you don't want the queue to grow later... you have to shrink the queue you allow to build later so it can absorb those deferred entries.

Imagine... *** are your desired standby line.. +++ are excess demand $ are returning customers and | is your line cap.

You start with something like this..

0900 - ************................|
0920 - ******************..........|
1000 - ****************************|
1010 - ****************************|++++
1020 - ****************************|++++

assume | is a 60 minute wait. Now the **s will decrease as the attraction eats up the queue. If the ++s are a reasonable level... they can be absorbed into the line left of the | when they return (similar to FP).

But if you have this situation...
1100 - ************************$$$|+++++++++++++++++++++++
1130 - **********************$$$$$|+++++++++++++++++++++++
1200 - ********************$$$$$$|+++++++++++++++++++++++

The amount of +++ will be large.. and as this accumulates (becuase you are handing out passes at a rate faster than the attraction eats the line) you must do one of three things
1) limit the number ++ you will accept or
2) limit the rate you hand out passes or
3) move | to the left to be able to absorb the returning +s without causing the wait to balloon

So you end up with something like
1200 - **************|$$$$$$$$++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1400 - *******|$$$$$$$$$$$$$+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

According to the reports.. they ended up here
1730 -|$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


You can hold less and less 'walk up' capacity as the day goes on because of all the return people.

What would be really interesting to know about the test is how they were advertising the wait time. The wait time is what influences the +'s in the illustration above.

Queues work through a feedback system. People make a decision of "is X minutes worth waiting for this attraction".. if yes, they get in line. That decision repeats itself and if the inflow of people exceeds the attraction's capacity, the line grows. Eventually the line grows enough that people see a new wait time.. and decide that wait is too much and they pass.

This process happens constantly as people evaluate getting line or heading to the attraction.

If they artificially cap the line at say.. 60 minutes. For many people, 60mins is still considered a 'low' wait time for Soarin' so they happily will queue up. So now Disney is giving out return times at a pretty significant rate... a posted wait time of 60mins could really draw a lot of people (high rate of +'s above)

In the old system, the posted wait time would be increasing during this rush of people, deterring people from queuing up. If they didn't mimic this type of behavior in the wait time... they would effectively overload the demand for the attraction with no negative feedback to fight it.

What I think is difficult to achieve in this type of model is
1) how to keep toggling between return passes and feeding the queue. The queue will shrink, so you need to fill it, and you don't necessarily want/expect return users to be the only way to fill it
2) How they advertised wait times to account for the return users. The physical line may look like a 30min line, but that's because a ton of poeple will be showing up shortly, so you need to advertise a LONGER wait.. to discourage people thinking there is a short wait, and again increasing demand

The hard part about this kind of model is influencing the ++ rate and how to practically hand out passes.

FP did this by using the machines, rationing who could get a pass, and using the return time to influence behavior.

If all you have is people handing out paper passes as fast as people ask for them... and don't replace the feedback loop... the demand will overload the queue easily.

 

[Oddysey]

This could be a logistics nightmare with park guest trying to fit return tickets in with 3 fastpass+ appointments, an ADR, and a potential park hop. In my opinion, more planning = less fun, but that is not the point of my post.

If Disney truly wanted to add value to the consumer they could do so by expanding attraction offerings and/or adding a theater to Soarin. It seems to me that Disney has learned how to manipulate the consumers perception of value while taking away consumer choice. The consumers perceives that their time is better spent when given a return ticket rather than actually waiting in line despite the fact that they cant experience the attraction multiple times per day or at the particular time that they are choosing.

As a passholder I often go to the parks spontaneously, and in the evening. That being said, fastpass+ is generally not available anymore because it has already been booked, and possibly all of the return tickets will have been handed out before I get there. I no longer have the choice to get in the stand by line at 8:55pm when the line is considerably shorter than at 1:00pm. I have historically experienced high demand attractions by choosing to go when I know the lines are shorter. This could mean early morning or late at night. If the ticket hand out is permanently implemented I no longer have that choice, and my ability to visit an attraction spontaneously is eliminated. I am not one who is easily sold on the perception of greater convenience being an adequate replacement for freedom of choice.

 

[asianway]

People keep calling it FP is just flat out wrong and is just inflammatory.

FP is more about shifting demand by dispursing a percentage of it. This model is about overflow. Push excess demand into the future.

Where this is so different in queueing theory is it tries to siphon off EXCESS demand. The consequence though is by deferring those queue entries... if you don't want the queue to grow later... you have to shrink the queue you allow to build later so it can absorb those deferred entries.

Imagine... *** are your desired standby line.. +++ are excess demand $ are returning customers and | is your line cap.

You start with something like this..

0900 - ************................|
0920 - ******************..........|
1000 - ****************************|
1010 - ****************************|++++
1020 - ****************************|++++

assume | is a 60 minute wait. Now the **s will decrease as the attraction eats up the queue. If the ++s are a reasonable level... they can be absorbed into the line left of the | when they return (similar to FP).

But if you have this situation...
1100 - ************************$$$|+++++++++++++++++++++++
1130 - **********************$$$$$|+++++++++++++++++++++++
1200 - ********************$$$$$$|+++++++++++++++++++++++

The amount of +++ will be large.. and as this accumulates (becuase you are handing out passes at a rate faster than the attraction eats the line) you must do one of three things
1) limit the number ++ you will accept or
2) limit the rate you hand out passes or
3) move | to the left to be able to absorb the returning +s without causing the wait to balloon

So you end up with something like
1200 - **************|$$$$$$$$++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1400 - *******|$$$$$$$$$$$$$+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

According to the reports.. they ended up here
1730 -|$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


You can hold less and less 'walk up' capacity as the day goes on because of all the return people.

What would be really interesting to know about the test is how they were advertising the wait time. The wait time is what influences the +'s in the illustration above.

Queues work through a feedback system. People make a decision of "is X minutes worth waiting for this attraction".. if yes, they get in line. That decision repeats itself and if the inflow of people exceeds the attraction's capacity, the line grows. Eventually the line grows enough that people see a new wait time.. and decide that wait is too much and they pass.

This process happens constantly as people evaluate getting line or heading to the attraction.

If they artificially cap the line at say.. 60 minutes. For many people, 60mins is still considered a 'low' wait time for Soarin' so they happily will queue up. So now Disney is giving out return times at a pretty significant rate... a posted wait time of 60mins could really draw a lot of people (high rate of +'s above)

In the old system, the posted wait time would be increasing during this rush of people, deterring people from queuing up. If they didn't mimic this type of behavior in the wait time... they would effectively overload the demand for the attraction with no negative feedback to fight it.

What I think is difficult to achieve in this type of model is
1) how to keep toggling between return passes and feeding the queue. The queue will shrink, so you need to fill it, and you don't necessarily want/expect return users to be the only way to fill it
2) How they advertised wait times to account for the return users. The physical line may look like a 30min line, but that's because a ton of poeple will be showing up shortly, so you need to advertise a LONGER wait.. to discourage people thinking there is a short wait, and again increasing demand

The hard part about this kind of model is influencing the ++ rate and how to practically hand out passes.

FP did this by using the machines, rationing who could get a pass, and using the return time to influence behavior.

If all you have is people handing out paper passes as fast as people ask for them... and don't replace the feedback loop... the demand will overload the queue easily.

I think if they hang that diagram up at the paper ticket distribution line it should solve it

 

[asianway]

The outrage and negativity in this thread is truly unreal...

'How can Disney do this to us?? I cannot believe that they are trying to accommodate those guests who would not typically get a chance to experience an attraction! Universal would never stoop to this level...'

http://www.orlandoinformer.com/universal/harry-potter-world-return-tickets/

I honestly need to stop visiting this site. The negativity is overwhelming. I suspect half of the haters have never step foot in WDW.

Don't let the door bump you on the way out

 

[Oddysey]

The outrage and negativity in this thread is truly unreal...

'How can Disney do this to us?? I cannot believe that they are trying to accommodate those guests who would not typically get a chance to experience an attraction! Universal would never stoop to this level...'

http://www.orlandoinformer.com/universal/harry-potter-world-return-tickets/

I honestly need to stop visiting this site. The negativity is overwhelming. I suspect half of the haters have never step foot in WDW.

Congrats! you are the first person to compare Disney and UNI in this thread.

 

[SoccerMickey]

I guess the biggest problem with this "TEST" is that is based on the notion posted here that if someone gets to the park after 5pm and all the paper return times have been distributed then that guest is not allowed to get in the queue. If that night is the guest's only night to have the advantage to ride Soarin' and is denied then that is a problem. And Disney should not be "TEST"-ing things that impacts the guest experience negatively. This queue was designed to hold a lot of people and it should be that guest's decision whether or not to wait in that line. I understand using this on a character meet and greet as the attraction isn't a ride but someone on Disney's payroll, subject to union restrictions, overtime restrictions, and just plain exhaustion. Where some can argue that Soarin' is suffering from exhaustion due to the condition of the film, there is no reason to try to conduct this test if that means guests being denied to board (if thats really what's happening or happened)

 

[ABQ]

Huh, now, if this new process was being done so the otherwise MASSIVE queue space could be utilized for something other than guests looking at a pretty wall all day, I'd be psyched. But I doubt it. I mean really, that's one colossal queue area.

 

[tsaintc]

Don't let the door bump you on the way out

Thanks for yet another valuable contribution to board...

 

[Mawg]

People should make signs that read "Need Standby Tickets" and sit by Soarin'

 

[WondersOfLife]

This doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It doesn't even involve Fastpass+? Why are they trying to change the way people wait in line! It's complicated enough to guests that there's already two options! Just keep it that way. Fastpass, or Standby. Not all this "come back here at this time" option before 5 otherwise you don't get to ride... Stupid.

 

[WondersOfLife]

Whoever is coming up with these new "tests" deserves to ride Imagination from park opening to closing without an option of getting off.

 

[natatomic]

Why don't they just get rid of FPs all together and then use this method of return time for the (one) regular line? They could give out more of the standby tickets since now they have 70-80% of the capacity to distribute amongst the guests (remember, it's a 4:1 ratio for FP to standby), and then just make everyone wait thirty minutes. If they can book people specific times to wait in for two lines, they could certainly do it for one and make it much less convoluted. It's the same amount of people either way, right? Or is there something about my math I'm miscalculating? (I am a woman after all, )
(I still don't like this system, however.)

Eta: I get that this kinda does away with FP, but heck, I think guests would looove waiting 30 minutes for EVERY ride compared to 5-10 minutes for three rides, then 1-2 hours for all the other e tickets.

 

[Mawg]

If they are going to close the standby line anyways. Why not just do away with Standby for those high demand attractions and increase the number of FP+ someone can get. The nice thing about Fast Pass Plus is it can be monitored electronically if someone missed their spot. Since Fast Pass times overlap it does not mean that spot goes empty on the ride for that time. Someone else down stream just picks up that spot. Electronically if people miss their window more spots can be allocated at later time slots and made available always keeping the attraction right at capacity. I don't personally like this idea but it seems better than closing the standby line and more organized. Don't let people have more than one fast pass for an attraction at a time but once that Fast Pass is used, they can book it again if there are spots left. And, allow booking of attractions between parks. Up the Fast Pass Plus to 5 or 6 and always allow a guest to hold that number of active Fast Passes. Towards the end of the night a person will be able to make a decision, do we stay and do other things besides the major attractions because they are at capacity or do we do less popular attractions, do we shop, eat or leave.

 

[MaryJaneP]

People, people, calm yourselves. This is just an attempt at waitline management. If TDO can manage wait times by rejecting to allow guests to ride an attraction, there is the probability that some of them will spend money that otherwise would have gone unspent. Really, do you want them to add food and merchandise stores to the wait lines. Forget that I ever mentioned that hideous possibility. What a colossal CF.

Anyway, to flynnibus' example, couldn't the same decision-point be influenced by artificially inflating the wait time boards? Simply have them say random large numbers (ie. 300 minutes, 270 minutes) so the guests have to make the go-no go decision themselves based upon faulty and impossible to independently verify information. Or randomly 101 attractions so people can never guess what is working. Seems like a capital idea!

 

[natatomic]

People, people, calm yourselves. This is just an attempt at waitline management. If TDO can manage wait times by rejecting to allow guests to ride an attraction, there is the probability that some of them will spend money that otherwise would have gone unspent. Really, do you want them to add food and merchandise stores to the wait lines. Forget that I ever mentioned that hideous possibility. What a colossal CF.

"What do you mean I'm not allowed to wait in line for this ride?! I can't wait at ALL?! Gaaaaaah, I'm so angry I could buy a t-shirt that I wasn't already planning on buying! Oh frustration! I'm gonna go angry eat 12 pretzels! That'll show them!"

As a local who almost always only goes to the park in the afternoon and braves the standby line, I would rather them have food or merchandise in the queues than deny me entrance to a line.

 

[disneydudette]

What would be really interesting to know about the test is how they were advertising the wait time...

I can't comment on in-park experience... but based off MDE... Soarin' has yet to post a wait time today. Yesterday... it never posted one. According to another site, wait times were also never posted for testing with A&E.

'Current' wait times have TT @ 100mins and SSE @ 35mins... everything else seems to be 15mins or less.

 

[Mawg]

I would be tempted to buy food in line if the food was themed to the ride. At Disneyland you can get a Dole Whip while you wait in line for the Tiki Room and I always do, I look forward to my wait. What if they had a cool drive up looking window at test track that serves In N Out burgers. At A&E they could sell Princess Chocolates. At Soarin' they could sell peanuts (classier ones than the airlines give out). Everest, they could sell some frozen treats. Make money while people stand in line and make people think they have not been in the lines very long. Or, at least sell beer!

 

[MissM]

Yes it is just a test. BUT...the fact is, someone felt this was a VALID ENOUGH IDEA to actually implement for three days during Summer. It wasn't a blue sky concept. It wasn't a graphic simulation. It actually changed the way the real in-park guests experienced (or didn't!) a marquee attraction for three days in a row.

That doesn't exactly instill confidence in me that "it's only a test!" because you don't move forward with an idea like this in the park, with real guests on a major attraction without some pretty serious consideration that it's the kind of direction you want to go moving forward permanently.

 

[Herah]

Here is what gets impacted, I think, if I am reading this right...

Sometimes, towards the end of the night, lines drop precipitously. You can grab a ride on a marquee attraction with little to no wait.

Now, you won't be able to, unless you got there before 5pm, and got a paper ticket.

I believe Anna & Elsa re-opened the standby line towards the end of the night. I think some people with late return times won't stick it out, so you still get some drop near closing.

 

[Mawg]

People should get standby tickets for Soarin' they don't intend to use and then when the standby line is closed hold up a sign, "Have standby tickets, accept donations or beer"