Rapid Fill Mug Program Fails (at more ways than you might think)

[Laketravis]

If the Coke was coming out clear, that's not the fault of RapidFill. That's the fault of the cast member for not changing the BIBs in a timely fashion. It's like blaming your car that you ran out of gas.

I see what you did there

 

[Uncle Lupe]

Still wanting the cup with the dissolving bottom. Solves a problem and entertains at the same time.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

RapidFill is advertised and marketed as a perk if you stay on site. The name implies anytime, unlimited drinks. The reality is that RapidFill limits the frequency, thus volume/visit you are allowed to drink.

So a newbie looks at the value proposition and compares to standard fast food price that delivers any volume for $0.99 juxtaposed against $18.00 for limited volume. The newbie develops a conflicting value judgment that WDW is overpriced.

After a week of making numerous value propositions, the newbie quickly becomes a once and done visitor.

What limit in volume?

 

[Goofyernmost]

Funny how every Cumberland Farms, White Hen,Wawa and 7-11 can profitably sell soft drinks for .99 without the need for armed security and RFID

I sincerely doubt that those places deal with thousands of guest a day. Even if you added them all up, the clientele is different. They are places where people come in grab a drink and are gone. Not comparing apples to apples. If you are talking about resorts with that many people, stationary, not transit, then it can become a real problem. Besides if it hadn't been for the public abusing the privilege they wouldn't have resorted to this. Let's put the blame where it belongs, to the entitled, dishonest, guests. If they had used restraint it never would have become a problem. If guests hadn't decided to bring old, sold for one trip, mugs back year after year and had no problems with just helping themselves to drinks, it wouldn't have happened. If society were responsible and honest, it wouldn't have happened. But, heck lets blame Disney for being greedy. I don't like how much stores charge for beef, but, I don't steal sirloins because I think the beef industry has become greedy.

 

[GoofGoof]

What limit in volume?

There's a time limit between refills.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

There's a time limit between refills.

That's not a limit in volume. You can still get more liquid than a human being can consume. To the extent that that's a limit, it's a meaningless one.

 

[Goofyernmost]

There's a time limit between refills.

True, but, unless you just staggered in after two weeks lost in the desert, 4 minutes is not an unreasonable time to expect it to take to drink the drink that you are currently working on. It is no real hassle for anyone that is planning on using the item in a normal reasonable method. Those that want to get that extra will have a problem and I, for one, am tired of worrying about whether dishonest people get upset or not.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

There's a time limit between refills.

Now that I think of it, I'm not even sure if that's true in practice. On our last trip, we were on the dining plan but our daughter is under 3 so she didn't have meal credits or a mug. We spoke with a cast member and they told us it would be fine to fill our daughter's sippy cup from our RapidFill mugs because kids under 3 are "covered" in the dining plan under their parents. We would fill the mug with diluted VitaminWater, pour it into the sippy cup (with official blessing from a cast member), then fill the mug again right then and there. It was never an issue.

 

[Laketravis]

I think blaming the advent of RFID cups and metered dispensing of "unlimited" refills on shrinkage and/or guest abuse is naive at best. Disney would not spend millions of dollars to develop, implement, and maintain a system to prevent the unaccounted dispensing of a fraction of that cost in syrup.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Disney would not spend millions of dollars to develop, implement, and maintain a system that prevents the unaccounted dispensing of a fraction of that cost in syrup.

Millions of dollars? Unlikely. But regardless, you're probably right. It's not about the cost of the soda, it's about the lost revenue.

 

[Laketravis]

Millions of dollars? Unlikely. But regardless, you're probably right. It's not about the cost of the soda, it's about the lost revenue.

It really is. But is anyone convinced that the occasional guest who would abuse the self-serve concept by taking 5 times what they paid for/deserved/needed would start paying 5 times as much because they couldn't do that anymore? Statistics prove otherwise.

 

[GoofGoof]

Now that I think of it, I'm not even sure if that's true in practice. On our last trip, we were on the dining plan but our daughter is under 3 so she didn't have meal credits or a mug. We spoke with a cast member and they told us it would be fine to fill our daughter's sippy cup from our RapidFill mugs because kids under 3 are "covered" in the dining plan under their parents. We would fill the mug with diluted VitaminWater, pour it into the sippy cup (with official blessing from a cast member), then fill the mug again right then and there. It was never an issue.

The system doesn't always work. You really shouldn't have been able to do that.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

It really is. But is anyone convinced that the occasional guest who would abuse the self-serve concept by taking 5 times what they paid for/deserved/needed would start paying 5 times as much because they couldn't do that anymore? Statistics prove otherwise.

It's not about people taking "five times" what they paid for, it's about people who weren't paying at all, i.e. stealing.

 

[Laketravis]

It's not about people taking "five times" what they paid for, it's about people who weren't paying at all, i.e. stealing.

Okay. Point is the same - people who "steal" based on opportunity are highly unlikely to pay for that opportunity.

 

[GoofGoof]

That's not a limit in volume. You can still get more liquid than a human being can consume. To the extent that that's a limit, it's a meaningless one.

True, but, unless you just staggered in after two weeks lost in the desert, 4 minutes is not an unreasonable time to expect it to take to drink the drink that you are currently working on. It is no real hassle for anyone that is planning on using the item in a normal reasonable method. Those that want to get that extra will have a problem and I, for one, am tired of worrying about whether dishonest people get upset or not.

I don't disagree. It's not a problem for me personally. I think the other person was trying to say it's restrictive compared to the old system or a fast food restaurant.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I don't disagree. It's not a problem for me personally. I think the other person was trying to say it's restrictive compared to the old system or a fast food restaurant.

I guess so. I don't know, to me even if you CAN drink a gallon of Mountain Dew within five minutes at a Wendy's doesn't mean anyone DOES or SHOULD.

 

[GoofGoof]

Okay. Point is the same - people who "steal" based on opportunity are highly unlikely to pay for that opportunity.

It's the perception of the crime. Most of those people don't see it as theft. When they put this system in the vast majority of people stealing soda didn't start shoplifting 20oz Coke bottles from the gift shop because they know it's a crime.

Probably a sign saying anyone caught stealing soda would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law would have worked, but this is passive aggressive Disney so they added chips to the cups instead.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Millions of dollars? Unlikely. But regardless, you're probably right. It's not about the cost of the soda, it's about the lost revenue.

Sure, but, what is the difference really and why should we want them to lose revenue. Is Disney a branch of the Salvation Army? Shrinkage is the cost of the soda. Shrinkage is lost revenue. There is no difference. The problem with most of the public is that we cannot wrap our brains around quantities that we cannot even imagine. We look at soda consumption by the bottle or cup. We cannot imaging it by thousands and thousands of bottles and cups. We cannot relate to the cost because we cannot picture it. There is constant talk about how Disney gets the syrup practically free. Unless Disney owns Coca Cola, coke wouldn't be giving that much of their own profit away. What would be the purpose if the largest single purchaser of their product was causing them to lose money with every single sale that Disney was marking up to incredible amounts. They would very quickly let Pepsi do that sacrifice. We don't understand the numbers that are that big, all we know or can relate to are what we personally use, spend or consume.

This particular problem really only affects the folks that purchase the refillable mugs to begin with. They are the ones that are attempting to make sure they get their money's worth. If you go to a counter service place they give you a filled cup, that's it. In other words, it affects only a few and not adversely at all. Again the only ones that this adversely affects are those that think they deserve more and more. I don't care at all about them.

 

[MrPromey]

If the Coke was coming out clear, that's not the fault of RapidFill. That's the fault of the cast member for not changing the BIBs in a timely fashion. It's like blaming your car that you ran out of gas.

Better analogy might be blaming the car for a skid because the rental company provided it to you with balled tires.

Your analogy says "your" car which implies it is the driver's/user's fault and obviously, that they apparently ignored the warning lights on the dash. In the case of a soda machine not dispensing soda properly, unless it warns you that the syrup is out or prevents you from trying to dispense the soda, it's the fault of the operator. (BTW, freestyle machines actually do prevent you from selecting flavors not currently available)

While the fact that the machine has effectively blocked you after not dispensing your product may not directly be the fault of the RDIF system, you can't really argue that this is a problem that would have existed without this system because without it, the consumer could do what they do every time this happens anywhere else - pick another option.

Whether it's the fault of the technology or the maintenance on the equipment that the technology assumes will work perfectly is kind of moot as this was a problem created by the operator that potentially burdens the customer while providing no benefit to the customer in the process. The operator determined that the minor degree of complexity and annoyance for typical customers and the failure of the system for a select few - an overall loss in consumer experience due to an "advancement" on an appliance that has otherwise faced few issues for roughly the last century of its existence - was acceptable.

I know at Universal, they have a simple fix for this when their rapid fill cups aren't working with the freestyle machines (which actually do provide an enhanced experience for the customers using them in the park over what their options were, previously). Employees have credit-card sized pieces of plastic with chips in them that "unlock" the machine for fills. They just put the card down, you put your cup over it and it works.

Kind of surprised Disney doesn't have a quick and simple solution for situations like this, too.

Then again, maybe they do and this particular cast member, not usually assigned to food, was not aware of it?

 

[Goofyernmost]

It's the perception of the crime. Most of those people don't see it as theft. When they put this system in the vast majority of people stealing soda didn't start shoplifting 20oz Coke bottles from the gift shop because they know it's a crime.

Probably a sign saying anyone caught stealing soda would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law would have worked, but this is passive aggressive Disney so they added chips to the cups instead.

So, we have reached the point in our society that taking things that don't belong to them is OK as long as there is no posted sign that says don't do that. That we are not responsible for being thoughtful, reasonable and honest for the sake of honesty not because of the consequence of our dishonesty. Or that it comes under the category of "nobody said I can't take it so it must be alright to do so. They didn't say no and the only other answer is yes.

Why wouldn't it work the other way. Why wouldn't one be looking for a sign that says "Please help yourself, take whatever you want" instead of "if you take this we will prosecute".