News Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge - Historical Construction/Impressions

[bclane]

Just speculating as others have, but possible AP Blockouts (2 months or so) around the time SWL opens or possible elimination or restructuring of lower tiers.

Ok thanks. I hope they don't do that, but who knows.

 

[vancee]

I said on the Disneyland subreddit that they should cancel all APs to help the overcrowding problem to which I was responded with by downvoting. Seeing as posts on here cannot be disliked, I'll say the same thing: They should cancel all APs to help the overcrowding problem.

Everyone downvotes on that subreddit, that’s why I don’t even go on r/Disneyland anymore.

 

[TROR]

Do you have a death wish or something?

Sure seems this way...

 

[Rich T]

... the only meaningful way to make the parks comfortably manageable year-round is to stop letting so many damn people inside.

AMEN. Another help for crowd distribution would be more attractions. Like fixing Tomorrowland with a dual-level setup full of new rides. Picture Tomorrowland with as many rides as Fantasyland! Combine that with a lower capacity cap and we'd have a much more pleasant park. And, above all stop the whole situation of locals flooding the park in the day's later hours.

 

[Curious Constance]

Sure seems this way...
View attachment 254377

You're trolling if you think the AP program should be removed lol

 

[westie]

I truly believe the FP system is messed up and Disney is controlling it and needs to fix it. I've said this before, we were walking past Midway Mania and there was a short line. Like only half the que was full so we entered the line. What should have been 20-30 minutes turned into an hour because the CM was letting every FP go and holding the regular line even when there was something like 10 people waiting to enter the ride. Thus creating a slow down that the 10 freeway at rush hour would laugh at. That's just wrong! Yet I digress. Apologise.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

With the inevitable crowds Galaxy's Edge will bring, Disney has three options to make the place manageable:

1. Limit admissions to the park;
2. Suspend APs for 2-3 months after GE opens;
3. Hefty upcharge to get into GE, for both APs and day trippers.

Bet your house on #3

It makes Disney more money, so yep.

Let's be real here...if Disney ever does anything to benefit the guest at the cost of reducing their cashflow, I'll eat my own shoes.

 

[Antaundra]

With the inevitable crowds Galaxy's Edge will bring, Disney has three options to make the place manageable:

1. Limit admissions to the park;
2. Suspend APs for 2-3 months after GE opens;
3. Hefty upcharge to get into GE, for both APs and day trippers.

Bet your house on #3

I think they'll do a combination of 2 and 3. They'll market access to GE as a private party "before" the land opens to the public. Most of the APs and die hard fans will pay for the parties. When the land "officially opens" they'll block out APs for a few months to help keeps crowds down. I also expect them to suspend new APs but allow renewals for the first year or two that GE is open.

 

[Disney Irish]

I'm in 100% favor of dropping the entire AP program. Just offer reasonably priced, non-transferable, non-sequential multi-day passes in their place. And eliminate fast-passes. It's hard for younger fans to believe, but the parks were a lot more pleasant and the lines moved a lot faster in the days when everyone just waited together in the same lines. (Waving old man cane in air) ...and in my youth, we only had single bobsleds! Ah, rose-colored nostalgia!

This would only work if it went back to pre-AP attendance levels. I know everyone likes to tout APs as the cause of all issues but its just not that simple and won't solve the problem.

In 1984 when the AP program started attendance was 9.8 Million.
Now attendance levels are twice as much topping out at just over 18 Million in 2015, with only a little dip in 2016.
If the rumors are true, only 1 Million of that is APs. So even if you cancelled all APs today and none ever showed back up you'd still have 17 Million visitors annually. I'm sorry but you'd still have crowds and congestion in all the usual places. Ending the AP program would do very little for the crowding. The only thing it might do is to bring back the off-season when maintenance is usually happening anyways.

 

[TROR]

You're trolling if you think the AP program should be removed lol

The subreddit for Disneyland is like anti-MiceChat. It's 100% positivity and love for the parks. If anyone says something should change, they're a hater of the parks, but when something changes, they love that it's changing. It's so weird. I highly recommend people check it out and just be shocked in its oddity.

 

[BrianLo]

I'm still in favour of them raising AP prices to be more in line with other forms of leisure that do not bestow 'pays for itself in as little as 2 and a bit visits' as the current AP does. Skiing is my big example. That or hard-capping the number of days one can visit on an AP.

Either giving people a certain number of credits to enter the parks (long term fix), or a certain number of credits to enter SW:GE within the opening timeframe (short term fix that I feel like people will be less likely to loose their proverbial banana's over). Or a new park (real, proper, long term fix).

People visiting 70 times annually on a $200-odd pass are the root of the overcrowding issue. Or perhaps start with just eliminating every form of SoCal discount. Sorry Southern Californian's, your primary benefit is proximity to actually make proper use of the pass with frequency.

I know monthly payment plans are a thought with culling the AP's. I don't have a problem with that inherently, I just think it's a bit broken that someone may literally be spending <5$ for their day when a tourist is spending 120$. No one on the balance of things should be forking out under 25$ somehow to spend a full day in DL. Let alone paying more for their Starbucks on Main Street than they are to enter the gate. The park is just too busy for Disney to be that desperate for bodies anymore.

 

[dweezil78]

Massive crowds and long lines at Disneyland could easily be remedied if Disney made solving the problem a priority.

I don't disagree -- but I don't think it's necessarily an easy solution. Consider there are really two paths (maybe three) for them to weigh in this scenario: 1) Keep the parks mega busy based on the current demand with long waits, crowding, etc. and deal with whatever complaints they get or 2) Close the turnstiles and tell guests they can't come in (and/or nudge them to DCA) and deal with whatever complaints they get. or... 3) Eliminate or scale back the AP program. I don't see a world where this ever happens or at least not to an extent where it would make a difference. So let's consider options #1 and #2.

• With option #1 guests may be angry and complain about a sub-par in-park experience, but ultimately, these guests made it into the park and it was their choice to do so. Nearly everyone knows Disneyland is always packed and they continue to choose to go regardless. If the consumer truly felt the experience was that bad and not worth their $$$, demand would decline. I'm still waiting for that to happen!
  
• With option #2 the decision is taken out of their control (which never goes over well) and they get no park experience (or an alternate one they didn't want). Keep in mind, many of these people drove/flew long distances, booked hotel rooms, etc. Sure you can give priority to on-property guests, but that surely presents all other sorts of logistical issues, crowd forecasting, etc. And you're still turning away other guests who booked expensive travel, just off-site.

IMO the most valid/rational move by Disney is to expand the park and add additional capacity/value to the in-park experience -- and that is exactly what they are doing additions like SWL, Carsland, etc. Any other solution leads to new cans of worms being open and new problems that need new solutions.

 

[Travel Junkie]

I'm still in favour of them raising AP prices to be more in line with other forms of leisure that do not bestow 'pays for itself in as little as 2 and a bit visits' as the current AP does. Skiing is my big example. That or hard-capping the number of days one can visit on an AP.

Capping visits is probably the best answer. As the price has gone up over the years, a lot of AP's are going more to justify the price. There is a fair share of people that go more than once per week. You could make a large multi day ticket with 10 visits for example and the expiration date is 1 year from purchase date.

People visiting 70 times annually on a $200-odd pass are the root of the overcrowding issue. Or perhaps start with just eliminating every form of SoCal discount. Sorry Southern Californian's, your primary benefit is proximity to actually make proper use of the pass with frequency.

I think the So Cal passes have their place. Work habits have changed as more workers have flexible schedules, but for the most part it is a Monday-Friday 9-5 workforce. The So Cal passes push those visitors to traditionally non busy times. Get rid of them and more locals just go on the weekend and holidays. What is needed is for them to tweak the passes through limiting sales (already doing) through price, and blockout dates.

 

[Curious Constance]

This would only work if it went back to pre-AP attendance levels. I know everyone likes to tout APs as the cause of all issues but its just not that simple and won't solve the problem.

In 1984 when the AP program started attendance was 9.8 Million.
Now attendance levels are twice as much topping out at just over 18 Million in 2015, with only a little dip in 2016.
If the rumors are true, only 1 Million of that is APs. So even if you cancelled all APs today and none ever showed back up you'd still have 17 Million visitors annually. I'm sorry but you'd still have crowds and congestion in all the usual places. Ending the AP program would do very little for the crowding. The only thing it might do is to bring back the off-season when maintenance is usually happening anyways.

The one million number only makes sense if each AP only comes to the park once per year. But when you have one million people visiting multiple times a year, they figure WAY more into the 17 million than just one million.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

I don't disagree -- but I don't think it's necessarily an easy solution. Consider there are really two paths (maybe three) for them to weigh in this scenario: 1) Keep the parks mega busy based on the current demand with long waits, crowding, etc. and deal with whatever complaints they get or 2) Close the turnstiles and tell guests they can't come in (and/or nudge them to DCA) and deal with whatever complaints they get. or... 3) Eliminate or scale back the AP program. I don't see a world where this ever happens or at least not to an extent where it would make a difference. So let's consider options #1 and #2.

• With option #1 guests may be angry and complain about a sub-par in-park experience, but ultimately, these guests made it into the park and it was their choice to do so. Nearly everyone knows Disneyland is always packed and they continue to choose to go regardless. If the consumer truly felt the experience was that bad and not worth their $$$, demand would decline. I'm still waiting for that to happen!
  
• With option #2 the decision is taken out of their control (which never goes over well) and they get no park experience (or an alternate one they didn't want). Keep in mind, many of these people drove/flew long distances, booked hotel rooms, etc. Sure you can give priority to on-property guests, but that surely presents all other sorts of logistical issues, crowd forecasting, etc. And you're still turning away other guests who booked expensive travel, just off-site.

IMO the most valid/rational move by Disney is to expand the park and add additional capacity/value to the in-park experience -- and that is exactly what they are doing additions like SWL, Carsland, etc. Any other solution leads to new cans of worms being open and new problems that need new solutions.

Agree with your scenarios and options for Disney, however I don't believe it's as complex a problem as you've laid out. It's been proven that expanding and adding capacity only drives more attendance, not make the parks more roomy. The Carsland expansion made DCA more crowded not less.

We don't have access to the resort's annual profits, but it's reasonable to assume that Disney's Anaheim property is contributing nicely to P&R's annual bottom line. Using that assumption I'm convinced that Disney could easily reduce the number of admissions by several thousand (at least) during busy times and offset any reduction in income by increasing prices. Instead it continues to selfishly increase prices AND open the doors to as many people as possible until the place is bursting at the seams.

The net of all this is that the company hasn't done anything to prove to me that it cares and is committed to addressing the problem, and the local fans don't seem to be bothered much.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

The subreddit for Disneyland is like anti-MiceChat. It's 100% positivity and love for the parks. If anyone says something should change, they're a hater of the parks, but when something changes, they love that it's changing. It's so weird. I highly recommend people check it out and just be shocked in its oddity.

I'm afraid I'll be sucked into the vortex of positivity.

Maybe I could use a little Disneyland positivity. My relationship with it has been troubled lately and we were on the verge of breaking up late last year. Disneyland I wish I knew how to quit you.

 

[dweezil78]

We don't have access to the resort's annual profits, but it's reasonable to assume that Disney's Anaheim property is contributing nicely to P&R's annual bottom line. Using that assumption I'm convinced that Disney could easily reduce the number of admissions by several thousand (at least) during busy times and offset any reduction in income by increasing prices. Instead it continues to selfishly increase prices AND open the doors to as many people as possible until the place is bursting at the seams.

Right -- but customers can freely talk with their wallets and despite the price increases, the demand still is there. When you start reducing admissions, you are essentially telling your customer (in their minds) 'Sorry, we don't want you here.' and well, people don't respond kindly to that. Especially people who have traveled a very long way to be there (and paid for it), taken off a day of work, etc.

 

[Rich T]

Right -- but customers can freely talk with their wallets and despite the price increases, the demand still is there. When you start reducing admissions, you are essentially telling your customer (in their minds) 'Sorry, we don't want you here.' and well, people don't respond kindly to that. Especially people who have traveled a very long way to be there (and paid for it), taken off a day of work, etc.

Clark Griswold is a moron who failed to do the most basic research about the park he planned his cross-country trip around. I have no sympathy for anyone who tries to get into DL later in the day and finds it closed due to capacity. Early bird gets the rides. Snoozerz iz Loozerz.

Under no circumstance should a park keep admitting people to the point where everyone inside is sensing something's terribly awry and potentially dangerous. Closing the gates is telling people, "We're actually putting your safety ahead of our profits."

 

[dweezil78]

Clark Griswold is a moron who failed to do the most basic research about the park he planned his cross-country trip around. I have no sympathy for anyone who tries to get into DL later in the day and finds it closed due to capacity. Early bird gets the rides. Snoozerz iz Loozerz.

Under no circumstance should a park keep admitting people to the point where everyone inside is sensing something's terribly awry and potentially dangerous. Closing the gates is telling people, "We're actually putting your safety ahead of our profits."

As busy as the park gets, I've never felt unsafe. Annoyed, frustrated, unsatisfied... absolutely. But never unsafe. The days where it does get into unsafe territory are the few days in the year that they actually close the park temporarily to guests. Are there times that I question the sanity of any guest willing to pay $$$ to go inside and put up with those crowds? Absolutely.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Eliminating the FP program might help alleviate some congestion, who knows, but the only meaningful way to make the parks comfortably manageable year-round is to stop letting so many damn people inside.

With the inevitable crowds Galaxy's Edge will bring, Disney has three options to make the place manageable:

1. Limit admissions to the park;
2. Suspend APs for 2-3 months after GE opens;
3. Hefty upcharge to get into GE, for both APs and day trippers.

Bet your house on #3

I'm still in favour of them raising AP prices to be more in line with other forms of leisure that do not bestow 'pays for itself in as little as 2 and a bit visits' as the current AP does. Skiing is my big example. That or hard-capping the number of days one can visit on an AP.

1) Keep the parks mega busy based on the current demand with long waits, crowding, etc. and deal with whatever complaints they get or 2) Close the turnstiles and tell guests they can't come in (and/or nudge them to DCA) and deal with whatever complaints they get. or... 3) Eliminate or scale back the AP program. I don't see a world where this ever happens or at least not to an extent where it would make a difference. So let's consider options #1 and #2.

1. Limiting entrance at the door. Uh..... What? Someone buys a ticket for a family vacation and because they didn't show up an hour before opening they get turned away because "the park is at capacity"? So, what, they get back in their car and leave? And that happens to hundreds of thousands of people throughout the year? Then when people learn of this they all start showing up earlier and earlier so that they can get in? Will they be camping in the parking garages overnight? The only way for this to work is for tickets to be bought for a specific day. This way, people learn they can't go to DL because there are no more tickets left during their planned vacation days. This then moves the battle for people to hammer the servers the day that new tickets go on sale.

2. Limiting APs. As mentioned above, APs aren't the full source of the overcrowding, but they do have some effect. IMO, the best solution is for APs to become a discount club. Buy into the discount club at an initial set price (say $200) and then tickets are at a reduced price for the year (with surge pricing). This way, it's never 'free' to hop over to the park for a few hours or every day. In the end, someone who goes to the park more often than another person is always paying more, as it should be.

3. The SWGEB surge. Disney didn't charge for early access to Pandora. It had only one party night for GotG:MB. Don't know why people keep thinking it's totally Disney's thing that they will charge for early access to SWGEB. IMO, the best way to handle the surge for SWGEB is to do what they did with Pandora: Give select groups early access by lottery before it officially opens. That includes APs so that they don't swarm opening day/month/year.

4. FPs. They don't have any significant influence on how many people show up. If the park is packed it's packed. The existence or non-existence of FPs don't change that.