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

[RustySpork]

So do you also go to your local grocery store when they install new freezer units to ask them how much they spent on them, and whether they could have done it cheaper? Please. And I don't care what certain posters here with agendas say about MM+. It has enhanced our experience in the parks. I do not believe for one second that JUST MM+ cost over 2 billion. The vast majority of that money went to infrastructure upgrades that were way overdue anyway. I have been going to WDW for over 40 years, so know all about how it used to be. Some things were better, some were worse.

You're acting as if you're the only person ever to have been going to Disney for as long as you have, but you're not. I've been going that long as well.

You may be right about how much of the $2b went into aging infrastructure to support MM+, but there would be no MM+ without the capital expense to replace it all and they could have sat on the aging infrastructure for years longer had they not implemented it. They had to develop this new technology which cost a significant amount of R&D dollars. Then they had to implement it which meant updating all of their software to support it, and all of their backends, add all of the MB readers to the parks, install all of the long range radios, train all of the cast to understand and support it, etc.

It was a very costly endeavor.

Also, tell us more about these "agendas".

Because it was cheaper/easier to buy an off the shelf beverage management solution http://www.validfill.com/

I imagine it was something like "Sorry Bob, you've already spent quite enough money on that.".

 

[LuvtheGoof]

I wouldn't have asked them if they could have done it cheaper - I would have tried to determine if the new higher costs for shopping there benefited me in any way.

You would honestly go that far to add up pennies of difference for each product? Way to much for 99.9% of us.

I agree MM+ was a huge kitchen sink project that was used to hide/include necessary infrastructure upgrades that had been neglected to the point of failure previously by management. Many of the promised benefits from MM+ will arrive with the pink unicorns ( never). The fact that management left the infrastructure reach that point in the first place should be cause for concern. After spending 2 billion ( the number being thrown around) will they now actually maintain it or in 5 more years will we be subjected to the "Son of My Magic" project?

My first visit was 1979 and returning usually not longer than every two years. Due to the changes imposed by MM+ the parks have become unworkable for us ( admittedly we have some rather unique limitations now that I would prefer not to get into) except for the "parties" where we do not have to plan months in advance. I am glad that it has enhanced your experience but it has totally degraded mine.

Sorry that it has degraded your experience. We didn't like the FP system, as it never worked for how we tour the parks - which is very slowly. New system suits us perfectly, as we don't have to rush to get anywhere. We also toured back before any FP, and while people like to think it was better - well, they're delusional. I saw 2 hour waits for Space Mountain (and many other rides) within an hour of park opening.

Nostalgia is a dirty liar that insists things were better than they seemed.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

You're acting as if you're the only person ever to have been going to Disney for as long as you have, but you're not. I've been going that long as well.

You may be right about how much of the $2b went into aging infrastructure to support MM+, but there would be no MM+ without the capital expense to replace it all and they could have sat on the aging infrastructure for years longer had they not implemented it. They had to develop this new technology which cost a significant amount of R&D dollars. Then they had to implement it which meant updating all of their software to support it, and all of their backends, add all of the MB readers to the parks, install all of the long range radios, train all of the cast to understand and support it, etc.

It was a very costly endeavor.

Also, tell us more about these "agendas".



I imagine it was something like "Sorry Bob, you've already spent quite enough money on that.".

Having only joined these forums a short while ago, you don't see it. The "price" for MM+ started out at a billion, then 1.5, then 2.0, then 2.5, and then even a few stating 3 billion. All within a 6 month period when the Disney financial records showed no such increase in spending. The "agenda" was, and to a certain extent still is, to get Bob Iger ousted, and has been for a long time now. There are some that make up all kinds of crap to get people motivated to write to Disney to get rid of him. It will never work, and never happen. Granted, it has been toned down a bit lately, but it was there in spades a year or two ago.

I will never disagree that the aging infrastructure cost wasn't huge. It was. But to lump it all into MM+ is completely disingenuous and a fallacy. Yes, there was a lot of R&D and many other costs associated with MM+. I'm willing to bet that it was easily a billion dollars for all of it. But it wasn't 2 or 3 billion as some have stated just for MM+. Could they have built more attractions with it? Yes. Would they have? Doubtful. If they hadn't gone this route, they would most likely have spent it on stock buybacks - not new attractions.

 

[RustySpork]

Having only joined these forums a short while ago, you don't see it. The "price" for MM+ started out at a billion, then 1.5, then 2.0, then 2.5, and then even a few stating 3 billion. All within a 6 month period when the Disney financial records showed no such increase in spending. The "agenda" was, and to a certain extent still is, to get Bob Iger ousted, and has been for a long time now. There are some that make up all kinds of crap to get people motivated to write to Disney to get rid of him. It will never work, and never happen. Granted, it has been toned down a bit lately, but it was there in spades a year or two ago.

So the agendas for all intents and purposes no longer exist? So why call that out?

I will never disagree that the aging infrastructure cost wasn't huge. It was. But to lump it all into MM+ is completely disingenuous and a fallacy. Yes, there was a lot of R&D and many other costs associated with MM+. I'm willing to bet that it was easily a billion dollars for all of it. But it wasn't 2 or 3 billion as some have stated just for MM+. Could they have built more attractions with it? Yes. Would they have? Doubtful. If they hadn't gone this route, they would most likely have spent it on stock buybacks - not new attractions.

It's quite simple really, TWDC could not have implemented MM+ without making these investments. For budgeting purposes, and approvals it was quite likely all lumped into the asks when approaching the board. We need to spend N dollars here, here, here, here, and here to implement MM+.

Lets say that they didn't update infrastructure to support MM+ FP messaging across the service bus. How would they be able to show you a list of available attractions in the app? Speaking of which, what if they didn't update the infrastructure to support processing the messages, or storing the list of attractions and availability in their databases? What if they didn't upgrade and run new power lines to the kiosks, or train CMs? What if they never invested in the MM+ app itself?

It's quite simple to imply that it shouldn't be lumped in, but without the necessary costs it would have been impossible to implement so it's a necessary expense. It's also completely lumped into the costs of MM+ so we have no way to even know if they would have asked for the money to improve infrastructure without it, or if it would have been approved.

You're right that they may have spent it on stock buybacks, which means it would not have been invested in infrastructure tying it directly into MM+ expense.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Sorry that it has degraded your experience. We didn't like the FP system, as it never worked for how we tour the parks - which is very slowly. New system suits us perfectly, as we don't have to rush to get anywhere. We also toured back before any FP, and while people like to think it was better - well, they're delusional. I saw 2 hour waits for Space Mountain (and many other rides) within an hour of park opening.

Nostalgia is a dirty liar that insists things were better than they seemed.

Add me to the list of MM+ degrading our experience. We never rushed anywhere either, and yet legacy worked far better for us than the new system does. And it's not nostalgia - we used the old system just back in November 2016 at DLR and still prefer it to our experience with MM+ in 2014. It is part of the reason (though not the only one) that we've chosen DLR over WDW since then.

I'll be interested to see what my brother and his family think of MM+. They're heading to WDW for the first time since 2013 (MM+ was only in *very* limited trials, if anything at all, during that trip. Legacy FP was still the system for everyone.). They did know they needed to book ADRs, but they didn't even think about FP+ until last week (they arrive later this week) - despite me informing them of when the FP+ windows opened. I got a lot of phone calls that night...."why won't the system let us book both soarin' and test track?" "What do you mean we can't overlap the return windows?" "Is it worth it to use a FP+ for the Pixar Short Movie? Figment? Living with the Land?" "how should we spread FPs out throughout the day?" etc, etc. They were a bit flustered on the phone while I talked them through everything.

Considering that all they did in 2013 was walk up to the ride, get a FP, do some other things in that land while they waited for the FP time to come up, then use the FP (wash, rinse, repeat throughout the day) - they were a bit overwhelmed with the new system. I would put forth that they are a pretty common family in that regard. At least that has been my personal experience when I've helped people (who aren't "Disney families" plan trips They aren't a "disney" family at all. They accompanied us on our trip in 2013 b/c my parents decided they wanted to make it an extended family trip. They haven't been to any Disney park since 2013, and likely won't visit one again for a long time (if ever) after this trip.

But, like I said...I'll be interested to see what they have to say after the trip...whether they feel that the preplanning they had to do was worth it for the experience they had.

 

[RustySpork]

I have a lot of problems with MM+ but 100% of those complaints have to to with being a local and no reserve availability for those of us who don't plan more than a couple of days ahead, and with bugs and gremlins that are still prevalent in the system when it comes to accessing and making plans and reservations.

 

[Goofyernmost]

In a word - YES it is of our concern. Part of my business is to monitor our suppliers for many things. Not the least of which is do I(we) think we should continue to use them as a supplier. I consider Disney to be one of my personal suppliers of entertainment. My responsibility to myself ( and family) is to monitor and determine if I will continue to use them as such, or if it is in my best interest to find and make use of another. If a supplier continually makes faulty ( in my opinion) strategic decisions, reduces the quality/quantity of product supplied, increases costs, and becomes more difficult to work with - then it is time to evaluate and qualify others who can provide the service. In my opinion MM+ provided WDW with mountains of data that have only been used for cost containment and not for the benefit of their customers. The most significant complaint against WDW has been crowd size for years and as of yet there has been no significant increase in capacity. All of the new lands coming on line in the next 5 years combined will not add enough capacity to address demand. As far as I can tell Disney has simply decided that the current size is the maximum they are willing to operate.

Ok, but, if you don't mind my saying it, you are taking your theme park experience way to seriously. Your also over estimating the investment and subsequent power that you have over what TWDC does and when they do it. They didn't have to have it be for the benefit of the customers other then in general. If that system helps provide a better experience, many of which you aren't even aware of, then good for you, however, basically the system is a management tool primarily and a system for the customer, (i.e. reservations, Fp's, ADR's, credit establishment, room keys, etc.) however, it is primarily the same as the engine in your car. You may use the interior of the car, but, its the engine that gets you from place to place. If you don't fix a failing engine... you aren't going anyplace.

You are correct about it being your responsibility to determine if your "supplier" is not doing things to your liking, if not you just don't buy it. If enough people agree with you there will be results. If not then it might be your evaluation that is faulty or maybe just different.

 

[ford91exploder]

Because it was cheaper/easier to buy an off the shelf beverage management solution http://www.validfill.com/

Therein lies the problem, Disney at one time was a company which pushed the limits of the possible, Instead now we get 'rebadged' COTS solutions which in many cases barely work.

 

[ford91exploder]

I have a lot of problems with MM+ but 100% of those complaints have to to with being a local and no reserve availability for those of us who don't plan more than a couple of days ahead, and with bugs and gremlins that are still prevalent in the system when it comes to accessing and making plans and reservations.

The biggest problem is the bugs and gremlins and the all too frequent total outages of the system during peak crowd periods the ONE time when failure is not an option. The methodology of 'high availabilty' systems is not rocket science and any competent system architect can design a system which degrades gracefully if components fail.

The current regime of ADR/Payment/FP+ going down simultaneously (and frequently) is unacceptable for any large corporation in this day and age.

 

[Bandini]

If MM+ was such a great success, why wasn't it implemented at other Disney Parks? I've also wondered why it's not being used on the DCL? I think that would be a great place for the Magic Bands.

IMO, this system continues to cost the company a lot more to maintain than they expected. The only reason it's still around is because Iger is at the helm and he can't admit it was a failure.

 

[ford91exploder]

If MM+ was such a great success, why wasn't it implemented at other Disney Parks? I've also wondered why it's not being used on the DCL? I think that would be a great place for the Magic Bands.

IMO, this system continues to cost the company a lot more to maintain than they expected. The only reason it's still around is because Iger is at the helm and he can't admit it was a failure.

One because MM+ has more customer facing bugs than a 2 dollar hotel room.

Two MM+ is not really a refactoring of existing systems into a new one it's a Hadoop mashup of Disneys existing craptastic computer systems with all their underlying dependencies along with new ones related to Hadoop and MongoDB.

Why do you think 4 years in we still can't do FP at. Multiple parks probably because Disney used agile and the 'story' was never completed as management took the first working build and ran with it in 2012

Other customers see the ugly reality of this system and want nothing to do with it plus because it's a mashup you would need extensive and expensive localization

The MB's themselves and the readers are the best part of the system.


BTW the backend has been discussed many times on this forum and others

 

[jakeman]

Why do you think 4 years in we still can't do FP at. Multiple parks?

Because the amount of time you spend waiting for and on a monorail or bus is time you aren't in a park potentially spending money. It's deliberately locked to discourage park hopping.

Come on man...that's an easy answer.

 

[Tom P.]

Because the amount of time you spend waiting for and on a monorail or bus is time you aren't in a park potentially spending money. It's deliberately locked to discourage park hopping.

Come on man...that's an easy answer.

Except that Disney continually finds ways to encourage and even monetize park hopping. They sell the Park Hopper option for your tickets. They offer express bus service between the parks. Etc. I can see Disney charging a fee for the ability to do inter-park FastPass reservations, but I can't see them just not offering that option if it was feasible to do so.

 

[L.C. Clench]

You're acting as if you're the only person ever to have been going to Disney for as long as you have, but you're not. I've been going that long as well.

You may be right about how much of the $2b went into aging infrastructure to support MM+, but there would be no MM+ without the capital expense to replace it all and they could have sat on the aging infrastructure for years longer had they not implemented it. They had to develop this new technology which cost a significant amount of R&D dollars. Then they had to implement it which meant updating all of their software to support it, and all of their backends, add all of the MB readers to the parks, install all of the long range radios, train all of the cast to understand and support it, etc.

It was a very costly endeavor.

Also, tell us more about these "agendas".



I imagine it was something like "Sorry Bob, you've already spent quite enough money on that.".

Did they have to develop the technology? They've had multiple patent lawsuits filed as part of this program and even settled with at least one of them which I'm sure contributes to the long term cost. Let's not pretend like the app is anything more than a glorified Open Table system.

 

[Tom P.]

Did they have to develop the technology? They've had multiple patent lawsuits filed as part of this program and even settled with at least one of them which I'm sure contributes to the long term cost. Let's not pretend like the app is anything more than a glorified Open Table system.

To be fair, a company the size of Disney is going to get sued over absolutely anything they do. And oftentimes will settle because the unfortunate reality of our legal system is that it often works out better financially for a company to do so, even if they have done nothing wrong. So the fact of those patent lawsuits does not, IMHO, demonstrate that the technology is substantially similar to any pre-existing technology.

 

[jakeman]

Except that Disney continually finds ways to encourage and even monetize park hopping. They sell the Park Hopper option for your tickets. They offer express bus service between the parks. Etc. I can see Disney charging a fee for the ability to do inter-park FastPass reservations, but I can't see them just not offering that option if it was feasible to do so.

When you monetize something you aren't encouraging it at the consumer level. You're discouraging it and offsetting your losses for those that participate.

From Disney's point of view, do you want someone in one park 12 hours with continuous access to food, beverage, and merchandise, or do you want someone potentially traveling from one park to another for over an hour (or potential 10% of their day)?

I know many posters here have a large stake in making sure that MM+ is continuously seen as a fiasco because of positions they staked out during it's development and it's not without its flaws, but in this case Occam's Razor, people. You aren't spending money when you are on a bus.

 

[L.C. Clench]

To be fair, a company the size of Disney is going to get sued over absolutely anything they do. And oftentimes will settle because the unfortunate reality of our legal system is that it often works out better financially for a company to do so, even if they have done nothing wrong. So the fact of those patent lawsuits does not, IMHO, demonstrate that the technology is substantially similar to any pre-existing technology.

I would agree somewhat but in this case they settled with a company who had developed an RFID based consumer tracking system which used low range and high sensors to track movement. The only difference really was that they marketed it as a security feature and not an experience feature.

The things Disney added in a rubber bracelet, MM head sensors and interactive features(which never worked) are not that substantial.

That being said I absolutely love the MB portion of MDE but let's not pretend this was some kind of Earth shattering invention.

 

[flynnibus]

Did they have to develop the technology? They've had multiple patent lawsuits filed as part of this program and even settled with at least one of them which I'm sure contributes to the long term cost.

Links please..

 

[DryerLintFan]

For those who may not have seen it, this might be an interesting read:

"The Messy Business Of Re-Inventing Happiness"

As @ford91explorer pointed out, it is rather curious why RapidFill did not take advantage of magic band technology.

Thank you, that was a great read!

 

[Laketravis]

From Disney's point of view, do you want someone in one park 12 hours with continuous access to food, beverage, and merchandise, or do you want someone potentially traveling from one park to another for over an hour (or potential 10% of their day)?

For Disney, I think it's a dysfunctional equation. They need guests to have downtime outside of attractions and queues so they can take advantage of purchasing opportunities in the parks, but they also need daily guest turnover in the parks because that's the easiest and cheapest way to manufacture capacity for those attractions (more people using fewer resources each).

Sorry to drift off topic............