• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Rumor Version of MaxPass coming to WDW in May?

seabreezept813

Well-Known Member
Disney’s website does specifically state that on-site guests get 3 FPS per day 60 days out. I would think if you already booked a package it would be hard to justify decreasing that number. Especially considering Disney requires such advanced planning. Wouldn’t want to be the CMs answering the phones if negative changes roll out. I would think the backlash would be crazy..myself included.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
this makes staying at the new SW hotel seem reasonably priced if rides are included

Except that whole: “not having any clue about the price” thing...


There’s another issue with star wars rides...a lot of grumbling (hard to know who to trust..) that the one “major” ride is in really bad technical shape.

Sometimes...things don’t work. Test track a la rocket rods
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Would paid-for FP also apply to the folks staying on-property? If those staying on-site also lose their FP entitlement then I’ll honestly fail to see what benefit staying with Disney offers, especially as someone with a DVC timeshare. Taking away that privilege would be a step too far.

@marni1971 seems to indicate otherwise, but I just can't see them not giving resort guests a substantive FP+ value. Especially if they also try to roll back on Extra Magic Hours. Those two things are really the big drivers to making on site stays justifiable at the higher costs and eroding them will negatively impact booking rates and DVC sales. And tossing some FP+ to on site guests is an easy thing to do.

Getting rid of "free" FP+ for off site guests, keeping it as is (or perhaps with 2 a day or something) for onsite guests and giving passholders something similar seems like a relative no brainer to me, if you then get extra revenue by charging the off-site guests for access to FP+. And charging on site and passholders for more FP+ beyond their "free" ones. That's extra revenue without doing any extra work and is similar to what Uni does so it would be relatively accepted.

It would still help standby a lot since the number of guests on site is dwarfed by the total numbers anyway, right?
 

monothingie

UNPRECEDENTED DEMAND ENTHUSIAST
Premium Member
Yup, because not everyone will buy it. I get 10-15 FPs per day at Disneyland. I just hope they have an AP option. Sorry if that sounds elitist but I’m spoiled.

Probably the thing that upsets me most about this, is how this devalues the ticket, specially the AP. Whatever schema they come up with the cost per FP, it is basically a backdoor price increase. (Maybe explains why there hasn't been the expected increase this year yet.)

Is Disney going to lower the price of tickets or APs because of the loss of built in FPs? Of course not.

It's even more insidious because for guests with lengthy tickets the price per day goes down with the ticket duration (1 day is $110, 10 days is $42) Now if you want 10 days of FPs at a cost of $XXX/day, that ticket is going to be substantially more expensive, throw in park hopper and water park, and you're going to need a second mortgage.

I don't even want to know what the AP options would go for.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
@marni1971 seems to indicate otherwise, but I just can't see them not giving resort guests a substantive FP+ value. Especially if they also try to roll back on Extra Magic Hours. Those two things are really the big drivers to making on site stays justifiable at the higher costs and eroding them will negatively impact booking rates and DVC sales. And tossing some FP+ to on site guests is an easy thing to do.

Getting rid of "free" FP+ for off site guests, keeping it as is (or perhaps with 2 a day or something) for onsite guests and giving passholders something similar seems like a relative no brainer to me, if you then get extra revenue by charging the off-site guests for access to FP+. And charging on site and passholders for more FP+ beyond their "free" ones. That's extra revenue without doing any extra work and is similar to what Uni does so it would be relatively accepted.

It would still help standby a lot since the number of guests on site is dwarfed by the total numbers anyway, right?

The people paying for those rooms aren’t looking for “value”...we crossed that threshold long ago.

It’s gone from “incentives”...to “better get ahead and pay for it or it’s gonna be bad later...”

In everything...including DVC which has goner to the 4th dimension.

It always happens in a “juiced” economy...this one is on steroids.

They know they can exploit because near every step farther on pricing they’ve taken has met almost as much resistance as put up by the Italian army....

Remember when “after hours magic” was rejected soundly at $150??

What’s happening 2 years later at $119??

People...are....DUMB!!!

Or if you want to be “kind” - immature and spoiled. Which is hard to dispute.

If bob can sell it...he’s gonna. “Turning people off”
Isn’t a concern.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Probably the thing that upsets me most about this, is how this devalues the ticket, specially the AP. Whatever schema they come up with the cost per FP, it is basically a backdoor price increase. (Maybe explains why there hasn't been the expected increase this year yet.)

Is Disney going to lower the price of tickets or APs because of the loss of built in FPs? Of course not.

It's even more insidious because for guests with lengthy tickets the price per day goes down with the ticket duration (1 day is $110, 10 days is $42) Now if you want 10 days of FPs at a cost of $XXX/day, that ticket is going to be substantially more expensive, throw in park hopper and water park, and you're going to need a second mortgage.

I don't even want to know what the AP options would go for.

It’s double charging for the gate entry - essentially...

Maybe not for that 1
In 500 entering with no interest of rides??

Like unicorns?

And let’s back off the Disneyland references...
First, average length of stay is far less...
Second, more first timers desperate for push in WDW at all times
Third, way more people in Orlando...period.
Fourth, less crowde days mid week in a Anaheim often that allows you to Navigate around the crowd to an extent...

And that’s just a couple of things
 

MaximumEd

Well-Known Member
Except that whole: “not having any clue about the price” thing...


There’s another issue with star wars rides...a lot of grumbling (hard to know who to trust..) that the one “major” ride is in really bad technical shape.

Sometimes...things don’t work. Test track a la rocket rods

I read the opposite today. Just normal test and adjust. The way I read it sounded more like they want the surge of a “grand opening” twice more than any problems with the ride. I guess we’ll see.
 

Lensman

Premium Member
What I wouldn’t be surprised with is less free fastpasses for everyone - just to give a flavour - and then options of various uncharge packages for more.
There’s two other numbers.

It’s happening AFAIK.
So 1 free “select” experience, then one of the other experiences, or pay $19.95 per person per day for 3 more selections of your choice.
Before we get the actual toxic revelation thread, maybe we can do some healthy analysis and speculation before the toxicity sets in...

So ideally, if no one pays for the upcharge fastpasses, advance FastPass inventory simply frees up and you can finally get that FoP FastPass that you've always wanted without having to wake up at 6 am on day T-60.

Of course, we know some people will pay up for these extra FastPasses, and I suspect this is the reason @marni1971 predicts toxicity in the thread-to-come-later-this-year.

Toxicity spoiler below.
Lots of people who stay in deluxes will pay up and lots of people who stay in values will not. Maybe this will solve the "problem" (in my mind only, probably) of big groups staying at the All-Stars who don't even care about any particular attraction getting the same number of FastPasses as life-long WDW afficionados staying at CBR, with said group FastPasses being booked at the 60-day window by agents.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Before we get the actual toxic revelation thread, maybe we can do some healthy analysis and speculation before the toxicity sets in...

So ideally, if no one pays for the upcharge fastpasses, advance FastPass inventory simply frees up and you can finally get that FoP FastPass that you've always wanted without having to wake up at 6 am on day T-60.

Of course, we know some people will pay up for these extra FastPasses, and I suspect this is the reason @marni1971 predicts toxicity in the thread-to-come-later-this-year.

Toxicity spoiler below.
Lots of people who stay in deluxes will pay up and lots of people who stay in values will not. Maybe this will solve the "problem" (in my mind only, probably) of big groups staying at the All-Stars who don't even care about any particular attraction getting the same number of FastPasses as life-long WDW afficionados staying at CBR, with said group FastPasses being booked at the 60-day window by agents.

I think you’re reading the reasonable outcomes a bit wrong...with of course all
Due respect.

People will pay for it...probably on a
High interest credit card...and it will increase the angst and expectations even more.

It’s a consumer world...and the demand is “more”...there’s no “settling” or “retraction”

And the other thing that you brought to mind is the fastpass system - still -
Is about crowd control. Which means if it becomes a “luxury” item ...fewer will
Use and they will still have a much larger throng of people to place with many more people on more days than when the ticket booth was first installed in 1998....

Gonna be tough...no matter what. More clientele bleed or more overall angst...likely both.
 

monothingie

UNPRECEDENTED DEMAND ENTHUSIAST
Premium Member
Before we get the actual toxic revelation thread, maybe we can do some healthy analysis and speculation before the toxicity sets in...

So ideally, if no one pays for the upcharge fastpasses, advance FastPass inventory simply frees up and you can finally get that FoP FastPass that you've always wanted without having to wake up at 6 am on day T-60.

Of course, we know some people will pay up for these extra FastPasses, and I suspect this is the reason @marni1971 predicts toxicity in the thread-to-come-later-this-year.

Toxicity spoiler below.
Lots of people who stay in deluxes will pay up and lots of people who stay in values will not. Maybe this will solve the "problem" (in my mind only, probably) of big groups staying at the All-Stars who don't even care about any particular attraction getting the same number of FastPasses as life-long WDW afficionados staying at CBR, with said group FastPasses being booked at the 60-day window by agents.

It all depends on the cost. USO has express pass. For those not staying at their deluxes it’s $70-$90 more per day per person. Not being familiar with USO, do people use it who are not deluxe guests?

I’m guessing that whatever WDW comes up with it will be a cross between fast pass, max pass, and express pass.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
It all depends on the cost. USO has express pass. For those not staying at their deluxes it’s $70-$90 more per day per person. Not being familiar with USO, do people use it who are not deluxe guests?

I’m guessing that whatever WDW comes up with it will be a cross between fast pass, max pass, and express pass.

That price point would be crushing....universal basically limits the usuage through the price...

If those at WDW go for it...being a bit of a
Different dynamic in customers...it could lead to a really vicious “have” and “have not” Dynamic.

That is a no win scenario. I know there is this myth that it’s “Luxury”...and it’s going to become more “exclusive”...

But it’s a MASS destination. That’s how it works...with numbers, that’s not something they can rearrange now.
 

I am Timmy

Well-Known Member
So, I just love it when Disney is going to make a change. A big one. Known for awhile. But they don't tell anyone. Until a month away, then BAM. And all the people who have been planning for a frick year are left going, "Whaaat just happened?". Sure, there were rumors. But most people don't read these threads, and even some of the ones who do (a la ME) hold out hope that the rumors are off. Never are. Disney did not used to announce changes at the last minute. They used to give people some time to make it back to an old favorite before it was gone forever. Or time to adjust plans to their already planned and half paid for vacation. WHY?! Why did they start on this wretched path of last minute announcements? There has already been discussion on the fact that for a DW vacation you have to plan months in advance. Would an early announcement be so bad? Like they are going to implement changes..... starting Jan. 2020? Not next month for lord's sake!
 

marni1971

WDW History nut
Premium Member
If (and that’s a big if) this makes fastpass less appealing that could be a good thing if the queue dynamics are altered accordingly to accommodate more standby. Queues should move more freely.

If the status quo stays the same it will mean another revenue generating stream and as posted above will be a step closer to a have and have not scenario. And do nothing for park capacity or guest experience.

Details and costing are still not clear but something different is definitely coming as things stand.

This will certainly be interesting to watch how it pans out. And then some.
 
Last edited:

monothingie

UNPRECEDENTED DEMAND ENTHUSIAST
Premium Member
If (and that’s a big if) this makes fastpass less appealing that could be a good thing if the queue dynamics are altered accordingly to accommodate more standby. Queues should move more freely.

If the status quo stays the same it will mean another revenue generating stream and as posted above will be a step closer to a have and have not scenario. And do nothing for park capacity or guest experience.

Details and costing are still not clear but something different is coming.

This will certainly be interesting to watch how it pans out. And then some.

It is going to be like watching a train wreck happen in slow motion. This is going to be one of those changes that every guest will notice. “You mean I have to pay extra for that now?” Onsite resort guests get the biggest “FU” because their $500/night room is just that a $500/night room with no tangible perks anymore.

I’m not an expert in queuing theory, but wasn’t the entire concept of FP to enhance utilization and spread the lines out? On a popular attraction there would be a longer wait, but fewer people in the standby line. Seems like this new direction being taken is saying that FP really didn’t have any advantage after all and the old system worked best. Seems like a step backwards. But as mentioned it will be the haves va the have nots.
 

seascape

Well-Known Member
If (and that’s a big if) this makes fastpass less appealing that could be a good thing if the queue dynamics are altered accordingly to accommodate more standby. Queues should move more freely.

If the status quo stays the same it will mean another revenue generating stream and as posted above will be a step closer to a have and have not scenario. And do nothing for park capacity or guest experience.

Details and costing are still not clear but something different is coming.

This will certainly be interesting to watch how it pans out. And then some.
The only thing that will reduce wait times as you have said many times is increased ride capacity in each park. MK needed that canceled 2000 seat theater and more than just adding Tron. A major expansion outside of the existing park is needed. HS is going to be insane until they add 2 or 3 more expansions, an Indy Land, more Pixar and one or two Marvel rides. AK still needs another section on the land between Africa and Asia and Epcot speaks for itself.
 

Lensman

Premium Member
If (and that’s a big if) this makes fastpass less appealing that could be a good thing if the queue dynamics are altered accordingly to accommodate more standby. Queues should move more freely.

If the status quo stays the same it will mean another revenue generating stream and as posted above will be a step closer to a have and have not scenario. And do nothing for park capacity or guest experience.

Details and costing are still not clear but something different is coming.

This will certainly be interesting to watch how it pans out. And then some.
I agree on all points.

Let's hypothesize the following:
  1. Off the bat, 1 FP vs 3 means that Disney will start off issuing 1/3rd as many complimentary FastPasses. Given the speculated 80% share of capacity, this means that complimentary FastPass will only have a 27% share of capacity.
  2. Let's also speculate that only half of the guests will buy the additional 3 FastPasses. This would represent 33% of capacity. I think 50% is high because all guests currently get 3 FastPasses per day, and I'd guess that at least half of them are price-sensitive. I'd guess that the onsite guests are less price sensitive and will have >50% uptake and offsite guests will be more price sensitive and will be satisfied with their one FastPass.
  3. This means the hypothetical new system would only give out 60% of the FastPasses compared to the 80% of the old system. The good thing is that this doubles the amount of capacity available to Standby.
  4. The other aspect of this that I think is significant is seasonality. I'm thinking that the crowd levels of holidays and summer mean that we may only "need" to buy the FastPass package in Premier Season and Magic Season, while being able to forgo it during Adventure Season and Choice Season. So in a way, this is a way for Disney to monetize seasonality even more than they do currently.
  5. I also think the new system could be a way to differentiate "frequent casual visits" from "special visits". If I visit multiple times in a year, I could see myself being satisfied with one FastPass per day. Meanwhile, if I only visit less than once a year, I want every visit to count and so I might be more likely to purchase the FastPass package.
  6. An additional (dis)incentive is that even if I only visit infrequently, but I stay for two weeks, I might be satisfied with one FastPass per day since I'll probably be able to hit everything I want to ride at least once.

And it's all these small disincentives that I hope will add up to reducing the number of multiple-same-attraction-rides-per-visit that we see now, which will end up decreasing the share of capacity taken up by FastPass, which will enable more capacity to be available to the Standby queue.

This could really be win-win because it would also reduce both the amount of advance planning and the resulting daily regimentation of schedule that everyone has to put up with now.

But enough with this silver-lining/glass-half-full thinking, let's get back to the doom and gloom predictions!
 

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

Top Bottom