The fallacy of overcrowded parks......

[lazyboy97o]

What? Where was I even talking about empty attractions in my post?

The need for planning is a direct result of the strained capacity. Disney is strained by design. More attractions would lower waits. More restaurants would reduce the wider need for reservations. Disney has abandoned spaces that used to provide those services.

 

[Chi84]

I think what the argument is, is that Disney artificially creates unnecessarily high crowd levels, wait times, maxed out restaurants because they are understaffed or under-utilizing space ie: "seasonal" QS locations as an example. This allows them to sell extra magic hours, dessert parties etc as a way for people to feel like they're getting exclusive access away from all the crowds.



I had friends that said they were going to WDW for 2 days spur of the moment. I tried to give them advice on how to manage it. They said "oh we'll be fine" and they HATED it. Hated every second of being there, waited in lines all day, thought the food sucked and couldn't understand why it's so popular. But in my opinion, they did it wrong. That's why they hated it.

Well, to be fair, it was my brother-in-law who said, "What's My Disney Experience?" I'm sure his two teenagers were on it as soon as they found out about the trip and were able to figure out at least how to get the rides they wanted. But there's no way they had the same experience as someone adept at Disney planning would have had.

 

[Shouldigo12]

The need for planning is a direct result of the strained capacity. Disney is strained by design. More attractions would lower waits. More restaurants would reduce the wider need for reservations. Disney has abandoned spaces that used to provide those services.

I'm not arguing the reason behind why fastpass is needed. I don't know enough about it and haven't been to the parks enough to stay anything about it. I'm arguing about the difference between saying you shouldn't have to make reservations and saying you shouldn't have to know you need to make reservations. There's a difference between those two statements. I don't care if you hate planning things out and want to play things by ear, that's your preference. But if reservations are needed to have the best time you can it's on you to know that.

 

[flynnibus]

That said though, I stand by my opinion that there has to be some accountability for your own happiness. If you don't want to have know every little thing about the place you're visiting, that's valid. But it's unfair to go to a place that requires a good bit of knowledge about the services offered and how they work and then blame them because you don't want to have to know those things.

I was with you.. until the last line quoted above. This is my beef... yes customers should be informed customers (never try to fix stupid..), but you shouldn't make it a principle to blame customers or raise the bar unnecessarily.

There is also something called SERVICE. It would be like going into a restaurant and menus being available at the front door... but if you asked for one at the table the waiter saying "you should have picked one up at the door..". The whole point of SERVICE is to provide value and gain to the consumer. Disney is something that was RENOWNED for it's service. It's why people had no problem paying Disney premiums.

But the path Disney has been on is to make the standard higher and higher for customers to do their homework before.. and if they don't, they don't just lose an edge... they get a really bad experience. And the standard needed for visiting Disney is too high and too complex.

If people don't agree.. they should ask themselves why so many websites have sprung up and can be maintained on such a topic if there isn't such a need. Or if they really think negative trip reports from customers are purely stupid people who did zero and just showed up.

 

[LaughingGravy]

Never said discussion is bad, but there have been many posts singing Disneyland's praises while bashing Disney World. Why not go to Disneyland if it makes you happy and ticks all your vacation boxes? Skip Disney World altogether if it stresses your vacation? It seems like a straight-forward solution.

There's an old saying that seems to apply to the above. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Why not? It's a long and expensive flight out there and there used to be a higher standard in FL that is lacking.
There was a fellow in our town who had the response to a massive property tax increase when it was up for discussion and before approved for an unneeded sports complex of "If you can't afford the tax increase, move.".

 

[righttrack]

Forgive me some rambling thoughts dear reader....

I have been beating the drum against after hours and before hours and halloween parties and christmas parties and blah blah blah for quite a while now. Disney is working to sell the park multiples times a day, all under the guise of guest demand as it relates to over-crowding. So, it got me thinking....

Are the parks REALLY over crowded? There seems to be an argument that WDW, and more specifically MK was never designed to hold this many guests. But what does that mean exactly? Over the past 20 years, MK attendance has increased by 5 million clicks a year. Does that # include parties? @marni1971 @wdwmagic @lentesta

Let's say it doesn't include party guests, for arguments sake. Because if it does include parties, then the MK attendence growth is a clear and inarguable fallacy. Attendance hasn't grown significantly in this case. They are just getting secondary clicks constantly, so it looks like attendance growth.

So back to the point....

MK 20 years ago averaged 41,000 guests a day. Now it averages 54,000 guests a day. An increase of 13,000. A significant increase to be sure, but nowhere near capacity. So where does the argument come from that the park can't handle this many guests?

It seems to me, that the busiest days have always felt busy. The big difference now is that the average days feel the same as a busy day. Is it the extra guests? or is it Disney's optimized staffing? Next time you are in the MK on what should be a normal day but feels wall to wall look around a bit. You'll see only one side of Space and Thunder operating. You'll see shuttered restaurants, and restaurants with half the registers closed. You'll see garbage in the queues and on the floor, and no custodial staff in site. You might see that the MK closes at 6p for 4 out of 7 days a week, thereby increasing guest count on non-party days. The parks aren't over crowded, they are under-utilized.

I propose that the parks CAN handles today's guest load, Disney simply doesn't care to operate at full capacity. And why should they when people will simply pay double for an after hours party where it feels slightly less crowded.

As long as MK remains the park with the most activities in one place, it's always going to be like this. If you had one park day, no park hopper and planned to spend 12+ hours in that park, which park would you choose? MK right? It's got the most do to in it. Evening hours especially. I have never seen the nighttime crowds bigger anywhere than MK. The answer is to continue to develop more attractions in the other parks. They're doing this, but they can't do it fast enough IMO.

 

[PixarPerfect]

If people don't agree.. they should ask themselves why so many websites have sprung up and can be maintained on such a topic if there isn't such a need. Or if they really think negative trip reports from customers are purely stupid people who did zero and just showed up.

You mentioned the Smithsonian earlier. It's a free destination and absolutely mobbed during certain points of the year. Finding food without a horrendous wait nearby on the busiest days is nearly impossible for someone not in the know. One would think that a series of free museums in a city would be a pretty straightforward visit, yet when one Googles, "visiting the Smithsonian," 8,790,000 results pop up, including many websites dedicated to getting the most out of one's visit. Sure people can go to the museums without any planning, but they may miss things they'd like to see, become bogged down in crowd-popular waits, or skip over exhibits that would have made their trip.

Looking things up and finding tips and hacks is part of our modern way of life. A trip to Disney isn't an exception to modern travel planning woes or by any means unique.

Why not? It's a long and expensive flight out there and there used to be a higher standard in FL that is lacking.
There was a fellow in our town who had the response to a massive property tax increase when it was up for discussion and before approved for an unneeded sports complex of "If you can't afford the tax increase, move.".

I have a rule that I don't re-visit places that frustrate or anger me, especially on vacation. In my opinion, it's a waste of money to pay for an unpleasant entertainment experience (a little different from taxes). The flight might be shorter, but if I was so upset by Disney World that I needed to repeatedly vent my frustration online while remaining very happy with its sister location, Disneyland, the travel savings wouldn't be worth it.

 

[Mickeyboof]

You mentioned the Smithsonian earlier. It's a free destination and absolutely mobbed during certain points of the year. Finding food without a horrendous wait nearby on the busiest days is nearly impossible for someone not in the know. One would think that a series of free museums in a city would be a pretty straightforward visit, yet when one Googles, "visiting the Smithsonian," 8,790,000 results pop up, including many websites dedicated to getting the most out of one's visit. Sure people can go to the museums without any planning, but they may miss things they'd like to see, become bogged down in crowd-popular waits, or skip over exhibits that would have made their trip.

Looking things up and finding tips and hacks is part of our modern way of life. A trip to Disney isn't an exception to modern travel planning woes or by any means unique.



I have a rule that I don't re-visit places that frustrate or anger me, especially on vacation. In my opinion, it's a waste of money to pay for an unpleasant entertainment experience (a little different from taxes). The flight might be shorter, but if I was so upset by Disney World that I needed to repeatedly vent my frustration online while remaining very happy with its sister location, Disneyland, the travel savings wouldn't be worth it.

Theres like... endless food options in every direction around the Smithsonian. All you have to do is go outside, pick a direction, and walk.

This example doesn't work. At Disney Parks, the attractions are inside and often brief. Even if a museum is crowded, you can still get in. You can still see whatever you want.

 

[PixarPerfect]

Theres like... endless food options in every direction around the Smithsonian. All you have to do is go outside, pick a direction, and walk.

This example doesn't work. At Disney Parks, the attractions are inside and often brief. Even if a museum is crowded, you can still get in. You can still see whatever you want.

Well familiar with the area, lol. Most of the restaurants are a decent walk past a number of imposing buildings and one would have to know the right starting direction (they're not "endless in every direction."). The quick dining stops are often closed on the weekends / for dinner, and I don't see too many families popping into Jaleo or the Capital Grill. A random visitor wouldn't know where to go for a sit down outside of the museums themselves without research. The other option is rolling the dice with a food truck which would be like a Disney QS situation and not part of ADR.

Anyway, my point.... In my experience, Disney is not unique in that research and planning ahead enhances a trip and that there's a wealth of resources available online in print to help guide that process.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'm not arguing the reason behind why fastpass is needed. I don't know enough about it and haven't been to the parks enough to stay anything about it. I'm arguing about the difference between saying you shouldn't have to make reservations and saying you shouldn't have to know you need to make reservations. There's a difference between those two statements. I don't care if you hate planning things out and want to play things by ear, that's your preference. But if reservations are needed to have the best time you can it's on you to know that.

Knowing that you need reservations is predicated on needing reservations. If you go to a restaurant and they’re only taking reservations one would assume the restaurant is full, not that there are empty rooms because the restaurant only staffed based on bookings that were made weeks prior or that while walk-ups are not being seated, some reservations may still be available online but the host has no access to such information. Disney is lying to their “guests” so that they not just tolerate, but in some cases praise, reduced service and offerings.

 

[Shouldigo12]

Knowing that you need reservations is predicated on needing reservations. If you go to a restaurant and they’re only taking reservations one would assume the restaurant is full, not that there are empty rooms because the restaurant only staffed based on bookings that were made weeks prior or that while walk-ups are not being seated, some reservations may still be available online but the host has no access to such information. Disney is lying to their “guests” so that they not just tolerate, but in some cases praise, reduced service and offerings.

Again, I am not talking about the reasons behind why fastpass and ADRs are needed. If you want to discuss that, you're better off replying to someone else.

 

[Shouldigo12]

I was with you.. until the last line quoted above. This is my beef... yes customers should be informed customers (never try to fix stupid..), but you shouldn't make it a principle to blame customers or raise the bar unnecessarily.

There is also something called SERVICE. It would be like going into a restaurant and menus being available at the front door... but if you asked for one at the table the waiter saying "you should have picked one up at the door..". The whole point of SERVICE is to provide value and gain to the consumer. Disney is something that was RENOWNED for it's service. It's why people had no problem paying Disney premiums.

But the path Disney has been on is to make the standard higher and higher for customers to do their homework before.. and if they don't, they don't just lose an edge... they get a really bad experience. And the standard needed for visiting Disney is too high and too complex.

If people don't agree.. they should ask themselves why so many websites have sprung up and can be maintained on such a topic if there isn't such a need. Or if they really think negative trip reports from customers are purely stupid people who did zero and just showed up.

Sorry, I don't want you to think that I believe anyone who has a bad time is to blame because they didn't research enough. This was someone on here just the other day who said the food was bad and overpriced. When another poster said they should have researched what restaurants were, the op said they had and still had a bad experience. The second person then shot back with "well you should have looked up what specific items were good!" That, to me, is taking things too far and blaming someone for the company's failure to provide them with a good experience.

I don't know, maybe- and I hope this doesn't come off in a bad way, because I really don't mean it to- it's a generational thing? I'm 20, I grew up in an age where if I wanted to know something all I had to do type it into a search bar and read anything and everything I wanted about it. I honestly don't know the last time I saw a movie or went out to eat at a new place without at least glancing at reviews, and most of my friends are the same way. It's sort of a fresh concept to me that someone wouldn't want to look up as much as they can about the places they go. Who knows, maybe you're the same age as me and that theory is complete bunk.

Anyway, I just want to stress that I am trying hard not to disrespect people's opinion here. If you're unhappy with DW, you're unhappy with it, it's not my place to tell you you're wrong.

 

[HongKongFu]

You think Space Mountain can handle 50,000 visitors a day?

No,
do you?

And I'm puzzled as to that disjunct piece of rhetoric(posed as a question) you bestowed on me.

 

[Mickeyboof]

We often talk about riders per hour, so am I wrong in assuming Disneyland’s Space Mountain actually has more riders because there are simply more hours of operation per year?

That would be a fascinating set of data. What percentage of Disneyland guests get to ride Space Mountain vs Disney World Guests with operating hours and ride dispatch capacity combined.

 

[HongKongFu]

The point is that no attraction can handle every visitor.

........an exceptionally unfair arrangement but yet widely accepted by the masses as a whole who at best don't challenge or perhaps worse are too ignorant or stupid to realize they just paid $120 and can't ride a banshee or a fiberglass log.


Evey marque/superheadlining attraction should be able to accommodate all qualified and willing guests.

Qualified = meets minimum height requirements and health conditions.

 

[SoFloMagic]

Evey marque/superheadlining attraction should be able to accommodate all qualified and willing guests.

 

[lazyboy97o]

........an exceptionally unfair arrangement but yet widely accepted by the masses as a whole who at best don't challenge or perhaps worse are too ignorant or stupid to realize they just paid $120 and can't ride a banshee or a fiberglass log.


Evey marque/superheadlining attraction should be able to accommodate all qualified and willing guests.

Qualified = meets minimum height requirements and health conditions.

Only at smaller of attractions could a ride handle every guest. Nothing about it works, from having the right amount of capacity to the costs required to make it work. That’s why variety and options are so important. People are spread out to not just other marquee attractions but also smaller experiences that help to fill a day.

 

[HongKongFu]

Nothing about it works, from having the right amount of capacity to the costs required to make it work.

Defeatist thought to be sure and shared by more or less every single guest who will not cross conventional boundaries.

You know damn well it could have been done if Disney chose to do it. It's about priority/choice. Priority and choice is why not because it could not be done.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Defeatist thought to be sure and shared by more or less every single guest who will not cross conventional boundaries.

You know damn well it could have been done if Disney chose to do it. It's about priority/choice. Priority and choice is why not because it could not be done.

It has nothing to do with being deafest but understanding the actual limitations along with the needs of a park. Such an attraction would be a poor experience choice to construction as a large portion of the park’s capacity would be tied to that single attraction. Any downtown, be it scheduled or unscheduled, would be a huge hit to the park’s capacity and ability to smoothly operate.

 

[flynnibus]

........an exceptionally unfair arrangement but yet widely accepted by the masses as a whole who at best don't challenge or perhaps worse are too ignorant or stupid to realize they just paid $120 and can't ride a banshee or a fiberglass log.


Evey marque/superheadlining attraction should be able to accommodate all qualified and willing guests.

Qualified = meets minimum height requirements and health conditions.

Old people have no problem opting out of things.... kids will grow into them... that means you’re most likely upset about oversize people i wager