I didn't see where you offer more incentives for the local.
How does that differ with what I've said as "the old model of once a year visits." because that is what will happen when the APs are discontinued. Locals will not make repeated visits several times a year if they must buy a day pass. It just doesn't work that way. Locals will return home after a visit. It isn't always so easy to return unless it is a short trip between their various appointments and obligations. The incentive of an AP is a monetary one since they paid for it upfront and the fact that the AP gives them flexibility to visit frequently and that they don't feel ripped off if they had to leave the park in a shorter time frame.No, it's not. It's more akin to what you see from FL resident usage, or what you see from DLR APs who live more than a half day drive away. They don't show up after work.. they don't pop in for a few hours and leave... they don't use DLR as a meeting point for their friends.. they don't show up at 2pm and whine about FP return times... they don't show up 10+ times a month.. etc. They consolidate their 'disney time+energy' into less trips where they stay longer.
If you really think this is a problem, then they must fix it. It is an unseen problem by you and you don't know. All you can see is the crowding an that bothers you. Nothing you can do about that.No, I see it as a situation where fans are so rabid, Disney is leaving money on the table and hurting themselves operationally (and in capital expense as well) because of the AP program. They are trading predictable guaranteed quarter to quarter revenue in exchange for having to spend more, scramble more, and a reduced guest experience. But if you are measured more on revenue and less on margin... or you can prop margin up by just cutting labor or raising prices.. the guaranteed money is the easy path. And when your boss is only on 3 year rotations... why rock the boat?
You haven't disproved it, but it's fine that you feel this way since feelings cannot be disproven.The reference was to show the fallacy of your claim the costs are pre-determined anyway.. so why not let them in. If you believe that.. why not go all the way to 'let anyone in'... I wasn't actually suggesting that it was viable, but in fact the complete opposite. I'm starting to remember why I skipped these posts before... its not worth the energy.