lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Remember, he lives in Bizaro World where Diagon Alley was only getting awful reviews.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
SJN1279
Well-Known Member
IMHO Splash Mountain is the best attraction in Orlando, nothing touches it. However, I enjoyed Seven Dwarves much more than Big Thunder Mountain. Seven Dwarves has an awesome soundtrack, state of the art animatronic figures, and two drops that produce airtime. Thunder Mountain may be almost minute longer, but I always felt the last coaster section of the ride drags. Just my opinion.
Splash is a great ride and I do think 7DMT is way undervalued on this board I still think TOT is the best ride at WDW while FJ and Spider man are the best rides in Orlando
just my opinion of course
Hula Popper
Well-Known Member
Yes, staying up till midnight at the 60 day mark in hopes of getting those hard to get Fastpasses is very relaxing.
My window opened up a few weeks ago and it was a lot of fun. It's another milestone along the way to build the anticipation of the trip. It was also a lot easier than splitting off from my family each day to run around the parks to collect fast-passes.
I know there are many others who don't like planning that far ahead, and feel differently, which is of course understandable. Everyone's different.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I don't ever remember saying that it was going to be a huge affect on income. In fact, it was totally bewildering to me how they expected that to work. Nothing connected. So that part I also felt was folly. However, since the place was in a need for a new system and the obvious eventual benefits such as crowd control, inventory control and personnel planning will come to be noticeable in time, then it isn't a complete failure. It will be familiar before long and the complications will be lessened. When that does happen, maybe, I will come on and say "I told you so" even though it is fairly obvious.
bhg469
Well-Known Member
No way? You, of all people think fp+ is great?! I can't believe it.....
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Have to agree with that. It was much nicer then having to run down FP's every few hours.
bhg469
Well-Known Member
You know what would be even better? No free fast pass system, then people who pay for it would have better use of it and people that don't use it won't have to wait behind a queue of people booking fast passes for an attraction that never needed it.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
Or even better, more high quality attractions in all the parks so there is less need for a reservation system.
OSUgirl77
Well-Known Member
Being able to book FP's ahead of time was the only reason we stayed onsite during my last trip, since we had no idea what to expect, and wanted to make sure we enjoyed our vacation. I love the Wilderness Lodge, but it is not worth $300/night with a discount. Now that they allow offsite guests to book ahead, I will go back to staying at the Hilton, causing Disney to lose another hotel guest. You get extra magic hours, the transportation to the parks is easy and rarely crowded and you can get a room for around $100/night in the off-season. Since I have no desire to see Anna and Elsa, 30 days ahead will be just fine.Yes, there were many MyMagic+ naysayers from the beginning. However, it also had its supporters. I don't interpret the @WDW1974 "I told you so" post as an attempt to claim exclusive rights as MyMagic+'s sole detractor. Instead, I find his post to be a taunt aimed at those who defended it.
Since it's an interesting topic, I accept the challenge of defending MyMagic+ financially. (Please, don't drag me into yet another discussion of its technical merits.
It's premature to declare MyMagic+ a financial failure. I believe we need to watch the next 2 to 3 quarters to see how it plays out.
My interpretation of data thus far is that MyMagic+ did result in a significant bump in hotel occupancy when it was an onsite-only perk. See my post here.
Since then, Disney has distributed MyMagic+ to offsite guests. As a result, the WDW hotel occupancy rate returned to normal levels last quarter (Q3). Some numbers:
Disney 2013Q2 domestic occupancy: 80%
Disney 2014Q2 domestic occupancy: 86%
Disney 2013Q3 domestic occupancy: 79%
Disney 2014Q3 domestic occupancy: 82%
(Note that these fiscal quarters correspond to the first half of the year, January to the end of June.)
For comparison, I quote from an August 3, 2014 article in the Orlando Sentinel:
"So far this year, occupancy rates have averaged almost 77 percent, up 4 percentage points from the first half of 2013, according to Visit Orlando. The agency said recent data also suggests that advance bookings for the back half of the year are running almost 5 percent ahead of this time last year."
(Note that Visit Orlando's numbers exclude WDW.)
WDW's huge Q2 bump of 6% is without precedent in the history of that resort.
WDW's smaller Q3 bump of 3% is actually below the Orlando area increase.
In Q2, WDW "guests" caught wind of some kind of new onsite-only benefit. Even if they didn't fully understand it, they wanted it. In Q3, this once exclusive onsite perk was unveiled to the general public, resulting in declining quarter-to-quarter occupancy.
Even more idiotic, Disney decided to sell MagicBands to offsite guests for a pittance. What once might have been viewed as an exclusive (OK, snooty) mark of distinction for onsite guests quickly devolved into cheap rubber jewelry.
Corporate Disney has mishandled MyMagic+ badly but, with the right strategy, MyMagic+ could have been a financial success.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I know you are pegged as the current resident troll (self-inflicted), but you'll actually probably enjoy Gringott's based on your preferences. It won't be as nausea inducing for you as Simpsons/Forbidden Journey. Coaster segments are about as thrilling as SDMT, just a much bigger scope overall. Whatever personal metric you use Gringott's is an E-ticket that fits into it.
Personally if I was only allowed to ride one thing ever again, I'd pick Splash too. It's not the absolute best attraction (although one of my top five), but it's the one I have the most nostalgia for and find the most re-rideable. But if I was allowed to pick one "area" of Orlando, it would be the Wizarding World as a whole. I might even be tempted to pick it above TDS somedays...
OSUgirl77
Well-Known Member
I'm glad that you enjoyed the FP booking process, I wish I could say the same. I was sitting there at midnight on the day my window opened, literally swearing at my laptop as I tried to decide what ride I wanted to be on at 3pm on Wednesday of my trip...that wasn't taking place for 2 months. I actually am a planner, but that was insane to me. Maybe I'm strange, but I never found the old FP system to be that bad. I never felt like I was running around all over the place, and I always went on everything I wanted, often multiple times. You're right, everyone's different.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Don't lose sight of the fact that to someone that has never been to WDW they are all high quality attractions. The proper marketing alone would shorten overall lines. Pinpoint a few as exceptional and the other all seem to pale by comparison. Just another unforeseen affect of good old Fastpass.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I interpreted his post the same way. I also agree 100% with everything you say here.Yes, there were many MyMagic+ naysayers from the beginning. However, it also had its supporters. I don't interpret the @WDW1974 "I told you so" post as an attempt to claim exclusive rights as MyMagic+'s sole detractor. Instead, I find his post to be a taunt aimed at those who defended it.
Since it's an interesting topic, I accept the challenge of defending MyMagic+ financially. (Please, don't drag me into yet another discussion of its technical merits.
It's premature to declare MyMagic+ a financial failure. I believe we need to watch the next 2 to 3 quarters to see how it plays out.
My interpretation of data thus far is that MyMagic+ did result in a significant bump in hotel occupancy when it was an onsite-only perk. See my post here.
Since then, Disney has distributed MyMagic+ to offsite guests. As a result, the WDW hotel occupancy rate returned to normal levels last quarter (Q3). Some numbers:
Disney 2013Q2 domestic occupancy: 80%
Disney 2014Q2 domestic occupancy: 86%
Disney 2013Q3 domestic occupancy: 79%
Disney 2014Q3 domestic occupancy: 82%
(Note that these fiscal quarters correspond to the first half of the year, January to the end of June.)
For comparison, I quote from an August 3, 2014 article in the Orlando Sentinel:
"So far this year, occupancy rates have averaged almost 77 percent, up 4 percentage points from the first half of 2013, according to Visit Orlando. The agency said recent data also suggests that advance bookings for the back half of the year are running almost 5 percent ahead of this time last year."
(Note that Visit Orlando's numbers exclude WDW.)
WDW's huge Q2 bump of 6% is without precedent in the history of that resort.
WDW's smaller Q3 bump of 3% is actually below the Orlando area increase.
In Q2, WDW "guests" caught wind of some kind of new onsite-only benefit. Even if they didn't fully understand it, they wanted it. In Q3, this once exclusive onsite perk was unveiled to the general public, resulting in declining quarter-to-quarter occupancy.
Even more idiotic, Disney decided to sell MagicBands to offsite guests for a pittance. What once might have been viewed as an exclusive (OK, snooty) mark of distinction for onsite guests quickly devolved into cheap rubber jewelry.
Corporate Disney has mishandled MyMagic+ badly but, with the right strategy, MyMagic+ could have been a financial success.
I don't think very many people (if any) posted saying they thought MyMagic+ was going to increase revenue by 11%. There were definitely some who said they thought it would change the theme park experience. I think most of the people on the pro side were focused on the FP+ and the magic band experience for the guest instead of monetary success for Disney. It is a change to the experience. Whether it's good or bad is up for debate.
IMHO the magic bands were kinda cool. Call me a pixie duster or whatever, but I liked them. FP+ is a bit of a drag. I don't necessarily like booking rides 60 days in advance, but it is a lot more flexible than many here (including me) hypothesized. We pretty much all thought that all of the headliners would be booked at the 60 day mark like an ADR at Cindy's Table. It seems now that isn't the case except for a few low capacity rides and meet and greets. It is nice to not have to run for fast passes and it's nice to book FP for the evening for a park you are hopping to. I could never get a FP for TSMM for 7PM if I planned to arrive at DHS after dinner under the old system. There are some pros once you learn to maximize the system. I'm not saying it's great, just not as bad as we thought it might be.
At the end of the day the whole thing was a poor allocation of capital for WDW. There were so many better things they should have used that money for. Their best shot at monetizing the investment was to keep it a resort only perk to drive occupancy at the hotels. I agree that they blew any shot at the 11% return when they opened advance reservations to all guests for a small fee. I'm not sure it matters how many quarters we wait. I think they are going to keep deflecting until the analysts give up asking.
misterID
Well-Known Member
I disagree with that. Not all. No amount of marketing would make someone look at Small World being on the same level as Splash Mountain.
You look at Test track and you look at Universe of Energy, and first-timer or not, they're going to flock to TT.
And I'd say, and have heard, the disappointment in the other parks that aren't MK, which is funny, seeing it might be the crown jewel in regard to attendance, but its my least favorite park, and a park they've been using your statement as a business philosophy for, which is sad and, imo, incorrect.
My Magic + is good in theory, but it boggles the mind they spent that much to make things easier for getting into the park and buying things. I think the mudd in the cogs is all the other things they aimed to use it for, such as tracking the guests, which is still kind of creepy and questionable, imo, and not in a big brother kind of way, but making a profile on what kind of guest you are in their eyes.
misterID
Well-Known Member
Agree. I think I like the FP+ more than the average person as I know what I to do at MK and it's not a park I like to walk around and take in the atmosphere and do things on the fly, so it's perfect for me in that regard.
And yeah, you look at what Disneyland invests a billion in and what WDW invested a billion in. And I know there's a group who loves to bemoan the "DLR had to invest it in their parks" but you know what, WDW didn't have to invest that money in MM+, at least not at this level. There are a lot of parks in need when you consider how much they charge for admission at the park.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
My point is that until you go on it you don't know. New people, never having been there, would go to the attraction not aware of it's popularity and decide for themselves what they consider quality. You may not like Small World, but, it is still incredibly popular. No one persons taste can or should decide what others consider quality. You like Splash Mountain, many don't like high drop log rides. That isn't quality to them it's fear and misery.
Anyway to get back to the point I was trying to make. As soon as you put a FP label on any ride, if you haven't seen it yet, you identify with it being a busy, quality attraction. If you don't highlight it as such then you have people trying other things thus distributing the load around lessening the length of all normally extremely busy rides. Next time around they will know better... but not the first time.
On the tracking aspect, now Disney can tell or care what an individuals profile is by them walking past a check point? As a group, yes, it does behoove them to know where the crowds are heading, but, to do that on an individual basis would take a literal army of people to sort out the information. The big brother stuff is just total unnecessary paranoia. Not to mention the fact that before MM+ you were watched via camera. Your real person seen, not a random radio signal. That was way more big brother then this is.
I don't deny that Disney had some type of voodoo thought in mind when they came up with the argument that the band was going to increase sales. They must have been thinking the everyone that went there had absolutely no self control, spending wise and could be talked into buying anything regardless of their ability to pay for it. That sounds more like an argument to convince Wall Street that it could be done by presenting it to folks that have absolutely no knowledge of human behavior and theme park mentality. But the thought of a profit appealed to them even if they didn't understand how it would work exactly.
Cody5242
Well-Known Member
The first 3/4 of Gringotts is amazing and you think to yourself, "this is going to be the best ride ever!" and your expecting an amazing climax, but you don't get it. All you get is a 5 second roller coaster for the climax. That's why I can't say it's the greatest ride ever and why Forbidden Journey is the superior ride. Gringotts is still a fantastic attraction though
Last edited:
bhg469
Well-Known Member
Thrills aren't necessarily the only thing that makes an amazing attraction. Haunted mansion is still one of the best on the planet.
Cody5242
Well-Known Member
Haunted Mansion is my favorite attraction. There's just no cool special effects like the beginning of the attraction for the climax