The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...

Cesar R M

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
Tony Perkis said:
Yeah, but no Frozen meet & greet.
Click to expand...
aah gods! .. stop it guys!

that comment plus the silly avatars.. are killing me!

WFtWtov.gif
 
sshindel

sshindel

The Epcot Manifesto
ParentsOf4 said:
Please let me try one more time.

Continuing with the example, let’s recall that 1000 people showed up at the exact same instant for Peter Pan, which has a capacity of 1000 guests/hour. In this case, the first person in line waited 0 while the last person waited 60 minutes. The average wait time was 30 minutes.

Now let’s say that Disney gave the last 500 a return time. Those people still waited 31 to 60 minutes; they simply didn't wait in the physical line.

Now, taking this to the next step to simulate the effects of FastPass+, let’s say Disney evenly distributed the return times across the entire hour.

The first person in the Standby line still waited 0.

However, the second person in the Standby line, instead of immediately boarding after the first person, now had to wait for someone with a return time. They had to wait longer than if there was no FastPass+.

Remember, that person with the FP+ return time represented the 501st person in line. They didn’t have to stand in line at all. If things were ‘fair’, then they should have waited 31 minutes.

Instead, they were allowed to ‘cut’ in line, reducing their effective wait time from 31 minutes to 3.6 seconds. (3600 sec/hr / 1000 guests/hr = 3.6 sec/guest)

That 30 minutes and 56.4 seconds of wait time did not vanish. It had to go somewhere.

It was distributed evenly among the remaining 499 guests in the Standby line. As a result of that one person ‘cutting’, everyone else in the Standby line waited an extra 3.6 seconds.

Now continue that pattern across the entire hour.

What you’ll find is that the person who was ‘supposed’ to wait only 30 minutes because they were the 500th person to enter the Standby line ended up waiting 60 minutes.

The cumulative effect was that the total wait time did not change.

However, what FastPass+ did was change how that wait time was distributed.

That person who stayed in the Standby line should have waited only 30 minutes but ended up waiting 60 minutes.

To that person, FastPass+ made the Standby line longer.

That person lost 30 minutes because of FastPass+.

FP+ does not increase ride capacity. FP+ is a zero-sum game. For every gain, there has to be an offsetting loss.

If I waited only 10 minutes for Peter Pan because of FP+, then I might have had to wait 50 minutes for Splash Mountain because of FP+.

Without FP+, I might have ended up waiting 30 minutes for both. The net effect is that FP+ has gained me nothing but it has made the Standby lines longer at both Peter Pan and Splash Mountain.

The only way to shorten wait times is to reduce demand (i.e. raise ticket prices) or increase capacity (i.e. build attractions).

In recent years, WDW has done the former much more than the later. :arghh:
Click to expand...

I think that where it gets into trouble with this is that in a theoretical sense, FP+ could easily prove to actually save time. Given the following kind of average touring plan, taking the existing wait times given on MDE and using the thought that FP+/FP has doubled the standby wait times. Also, assuming the PPF/SM/Splash are my FP+ choices.

FP_Table.JPG


You'll notice here why I said theoretical, because if a perfect guest return system were in place, where the guest did not have to wait at all when entering the FP+ line, then this shows that a person would actually reduce their time spent in queue, even if it is true that every attraction's wait time would be cut in half (two of the attractions above did not have wait times, or FP+, so I assumed 10 minutes, and since they are equal in both cases, it does not have impact on the final numbers).

Now, you'll see that once a true wait time is brought into the equation for FP+, meaning I do actually have to wait a small amount of time when I show up, then it can easily throw the numbers off. Even a 10 minute wait per FP+ attraction does end up having a longer wait time. That is why I said a perfect guest return system would prove the numbers above, and I agree that system does not exist.

Taken that though, I think it can easily be assumed that those numbers can be brought back by the fact that most FP+ attractions likely run at less than full capacity, meaning that those attractions, even with FP+ would likely not double their standby time. I doubt highly that rides like IASW have a 50% / 50% mix of Standby vs. FP+ riders, so more standby folks will be getting through quicker, thus reducing the standby wait time from the "double" estimate. Taking the following example, those in red have been adjusted to only have standby times impacted by 1/3 (66% of current time). This skews the numbers even more in FP+ favor.

FP_2.JPG


Just right there, I'm spending 36 minutes less of my time standing in line. Even adding back in 10 minutes waiting in each of the FP+ lines, I'm still ahead.

But, we will never truly know the true impact of this, because we're not going to have access to the FP+ percentages, usage, and other numbers to truly prove things out. But you bet your sweet bippy that Disney is going to be THRILLED to be able to have these numbers in fairly real-time and tweak the living heck out of them now that they'll be collecting all this data.
 
wogwog

wogwog

Well-Known Member
cw1982 said:
But what is different about the process other than what type of card is being scanned? It's still virtually the exact same setup, just without guests having to open their wallets.
Click to expand...
Actually with the AP, at least. my Daughter tells me her AP can be read through her wallet. She never is asked to take the card out.
 
cw1982

cw1982

Well-Known Member
wogwog said:
Actually with the AP, at least. my Daughter tells me her AP can be read through her wallet. She never is asked to take the card out.
Click to expand...

Interesting lol. My point, though, was that the integrity of the process of charging something back to one's room doesn't change between the two methods. The person I was quoting had said that there are people who "trust" the magic bands more than they did the card-style room keys. I was trying to figure out the logic behind that... still no solid answer. ;)
 
ABQ

ABQ

Well-Known Member
mahnamahna101 said:
Suddenly both parks reaching 10 million each by 2017 doesn't seem improbable :)

Hollywood Studios is toast... especially if a spinner is the only "truly new" thing TDO plans to add
Click to expand...
Though I have no doubt a spinner is being considered, I do not believe that is the only thing being considered, just the only thing Jim Hill let on about on that podcast. Hollywood Studios is in a bind though with the contracted space leased out of the Indy location till 2017.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom