Disney Fighting 'FastPass' Sales

[flynnibus]

The logic that making people pay will somehow negate the negative perceived effects is baseless I believe.

What causes the stand-by line to slow is simply volume of FP returners. Simply charging does not reduce those returners. You have to limit the # of returners. That means limiting the amount of sales of FP. Then, you have the new problem of fighting and struggling to get an opportunity to buy the FP before they sell out. That means you then have to price the product high enough to balance demand with supply. Otherwise, you simply have a new struggle like the 180day Cindy Castle reservation problem... FPs selling out 5mins after they are available.

Simply charging for FPs will do nothing to cure the problems people perceive about FP - it will simply make the Disney product less affordable to those who dream of vacationing at Disney. The solution is to control the amount of returners - you can do that with the system as designed today, or you can cut back how many you distribute. Distributing free or by pay - they both rely on limiting # of FPs.

I still dispute anyone who thinks 60+min standby waits are only a product of FP. Disney is the king of lines.. Anything UNDER an hour on prime attractions was like winning the lottery in just about everything but off-season.

[disneyfann121]

As Flynn points out, they already limit the number of returners, by printing a one hour window on your FP. They also limit them by allowing people to use expired FPs. Although I think they should enforce it more strictly, the lack of enforcement does have that effect.

Now what happens if they restrict FPs even more? What if they eliminate the system? The lines go a bit faster, but they baloon. A 30 minute wait becomes a 60 minute wait, because people get in line right away instead of taking a FP for later. And you sometimes get insane traffic jams like what happened with Indy, when that ride opened.

It's obvious that the FP system, like most innovations, was born out of necessity. Crowding at Disney parks has only gotten worse over the years. If crowds and lines were manageable most of the year, would they have gone to the trouble and expense of giving people another option? No. Is it a perfect solution? No. There is no perfect solution. But it's the best we got right now.

[KevinYee]

It's obvious that the FP system, like most innovations, was born out of necessity. Crowding at Disney parks has only gotten worse over the years.

Oh, there is pretty good evidence, based on emails and interviews with people who actually set up the system, that the motivation was capitalist in nature. They wanted folks out of line and in stores.

[danyoung]

What if they eliminate the system? The lines go a bit faster, but they baloon. A 30 minute wait becomes a 60 minute wait, because people get in line right away instead of taking a FP for later.

I don't really think this is the case. Without FP, a line that was formerly 30 minutes will still be 30 minutes in wait time, but will be twice as long and move twice as fast, as there is only one line and not 2 (standby and FP) feeding the system. As I've said all along, the only drawback I see for FP is that the standby lines are much slower than they used to be. Other than that, I love having the option, I work the system to my benefit, and I don't need to be a rocket scientist to figger it all out.

[flynnibus]

I don't really think this is the case. Without FP, a line that was formerly 30 minutes will still be 30 minutes in wait time, but will be twice as long and move twice as fast, as there is only one line and not 2 (standby and FP) feeding the system.

Logic that would only be true if the FP line is as long as the stand-by which obviously is not true by a long shot.

The perceived speed of slowing down the stand-by line (some complaint people seem to have) is purely a function of managing the merge point. The reality is most of the time the speed issue is perception because you are standing still while you watch another party walk past you on their way to the front of the FP line.

The speed of the line is purely a function of merge ratios. Something Disney totally controls - just like they control how many tickets to distribute for each return window.

[danyoung]

Yes, that's true. But it's not about the length of the lines - it's about how many people go through each line. It's my understanding that Disney runs the FP queue at about the same rate as the standby line. You just have fewer people in the FP line, as they're spread out over time. I could be wrong, though.

[lazyboy97O]

The perceived speed of slowing down the stand-by line (some complaint people seem to have) is purely a function of managing the merge point. The reality is most of the time the speed issue is perception because you are standing still while you watch another party walk past you on their way to the front of the FP line.

Last summer I was at the Magic Kingdom for two, non-consecutive days (I want to say a Tuesday and a Thursday). The first day, Splash Mountain had no FastPass available and the Stand-By line was 20 minutes long. On Thursday the line was 120 minutes long, but physically ended near the same point as Tuesday. Anecdotal evidence that does not account for number of visitors, I know, but I doubt the difference was that dramatic, as other waits were not so drastically different. That to me is a rather dramatic difference, the only remaining variables being 1) How many people simply opted not to ride Splash Mountain because there was no FastPass available and 2) How many people, seeing the line at similar points, did not believe the drastically lower Stand-By time? Either way, I don't think Disney really cares if FastPass makes lines longer. People perceive they are getting a shorter wait time and they spend more times at shops.

[Phonedave]

Good question. Because by paying for it, it would open the fastpass system to ALL guests equally and not to just those who get to Fastpass machines before they run out for the day. Once a guest is blocked out from getting a Fp for any given attraction.. I can't hardly call that "fair treatment", and offering it free of charge does not make it any fairer.

Ah, I think I got you now. When making it a pay option, it would not be Fastpass as it is today, it would be more like Universal's system, where if you paid, you just walk onto the "fast lane" any time of the day. At first I thought you were advocating paying to use the EXISTING fastpass system and I could not see how that was any different from what exists today.

Thanks for clearing that up


-dave

[flynnibus]

Yes, that's true. But it's not about the length of the lines - it's about how many people go through each line.

Like I said.. totally a function of the merge point. If you run the merge at 50% FP, the Standby line (assuming FP riders were always there to take spots) would run at 50% its previous 'speed'. However this is not reflective of your total wait. Wait is going to be based on the size of the line AND speed. A line that is shorter can move slower and still have a lower total wait time then a longer line moving faster.

FP could be used in lots of different ways depending on how you allocate passes.

It could be a pure load distribution. You could hand out tons of passes with the notion of time-shifting people's rides to get a more normalized rider loads. In this case you'd want FP to run at full speed and stand-by would get reduced priority. But for that to really work you must enforce returns strictly.

It could be a 'no wait' option where you give passes with the notion of low to no waits. For this you need to ensure distribution of passes for a return window are limited to avoid putting a large dent in the normal queue. Different time periods can take more or less passes depending on the ride patterns for the day. But this limits greatly how many passes you should give out - return times are important, but not massively because you are limiting passes so greatly.

It can be lots inbetween as well depending on how you allocate things

It's my understanding that Disney runs the FP queue at about the same rate as the standby line. You just have fewer people in the FP line, as they're spread out over time. I could be wrong, though.

The art of merge seems to be variable depending on the lead and the current state of the FP queue. A problem again created by lack of enforcement of return times and better control of allocation.

[flynnibus]

Ah, I think I got you now. When making it a pay option, it would not be Fastpass as it is today, it would be more like Universal's system, where if you paid, you just walk onto the "fast lane" any time of the day.

Yes, but a system that again - only works if you limit distribution of the passes. Otherwise you have everyone in the park paying for the same front of the line privledge... which simply means everyone is waiting in the other line now

[disneyfann121]

You guys have it right; I didn't explain myself properly. What I meant was that without FPs, a standby line may be twice as long, but will move faster. So the net effect will be the same actual wait time in the standby line, on average.

The real advantages of FP are flexibility and crowd control. For the individual, it means you don't have to entirely miss the most popular attractions if you never get there with the right timing -- in other words, if you have the misfortune of always facing daunting standby lines when you get to the attraction. You will still do your share of waiting overall, but won't have to skip a particular attraction entirely.

As for crowd control, reducing the length of the queue for a ride avoids logistical headaches. An exceptionally long queue could extend into areas of foot traffic and make it difficult for people to actually get around in the parks. Danyoung mentioned how the out-of-control queue for Indy, when that ride first opened, clogged up lanes all over the place, on Main Street and then doubling back to Frontierland, for example.

[danyoung]

You guys have it right; I didn't explain myself properly. What I meant was that without FPs, a standby line may be twice as long, but will move faster. So the net effect will be the same actual wait time in the standby line, on average.

This is exactly what I've been saying. And yes, the times will vary a bit depending on how Disney doles out FP's and how strictly they enforce their return times.

My big point is that people assume that standby waits are much longer now with FP, and I just don't see that to be true. The queue will of course move slower, but 60 minutes wait is still 60 minutes wait.

[KevinYee]

You guys have it right; I didn't explain myself properly. What I meant was that without FPs, a standby line may be twice as long, but will move faster. So the net effect will be the same actual wait time in the standby line, on average.

What you describe is true ONLY in the world where 100% of the people holding a FP go into the shops and restaurants, and stay off other rides.

To the extent that is not true, then what you have are "cloned copies" of people. At Disneyland, John Smith gets a FP for Space Mtn, which means he deposits a virtual clone of himself in the SM line. Then he goes to ride BTMRR in the standby line. There are essentially two John Smiths in the park right now.

If Jane Smith gets a FP for SM and then goes to something disconnected, like Nemo, then there are still two Jane Smiths in the park. The Nemo line is longer than it should be, because Jane is "supposed" to be in line for Space Mountain.

[flynnibus]

As for crowd control, reducing the length of the queue for a ride avoids logistical headaches. An exceptionally long queue could extend into areas of foot traffic and make it difficult for people to actually get around in the parks.

Except in DL they didn't have room at all and when they expanded for FP they mucked it all up. They didn't have the proper space and foresight to spend extra money to really redesign the queues and entrances to support FP properly. So you have stroller parking blocking FP machines... FP entrances blocking other areas... FP machines lost somewhere you have to find odd ways to get to. Basically - FP took up space they didn't have to dedicate to it - and I believe that's why you find so many haters of it in DL. It's a total cluster as implemented in DL.

But at least they don't have FPs running out practically before noon like you would at soarin' etc.

Soarin' is the only ride I'd complain about the speed of the queue.

[disneyfann121]

When we were at DLR at the end of May, the crowds were moderate, we used FPs, and we weren't aware of any of these problems that you mention. I imagine they are really an issue when the park is overcrowded. Of course, space is at a premium in DLR, and all kinds of problems crawl out of the woodwork whenever that park is crowded.