Disney Fighting 'FastPass' Sales

[geoffa]

disneyfann121 - "The six hour wait times for Indy was mentioned in that thread by more than one poster. I didn't make that up."

I have to back you up on that. We were there at DL about 6 weeks after the Indy ride opened.(April 1995) Wait times were often between 4 1/2 to 6 hours three days running. So, no, you are not making it up. It was a reality.

[disneyfann121]

disneyfann121 - "The six hour wait times for Indy was mentioned in that thread by more than one poster. I didn't make that up."

I have to back you up on that. We were there at DL about 6 weeks after the Indy ride opened.(April 1995) Wait times were often between 4 1/2 to 6 hours three days running. So, no, you are not making it up. It was a reality.

Frightening

But thanks for the corroboration.

[disneyfann121]

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

Plus, you can't get around the fact that any system in which you can pay to beat the lines...will be unfair to those who can't pay extra...or only with great difficulty.

To summarize both sides of this conundrum: if the price is so low that everyone can afford it, how do you limit distribution (as Flynn pointed out). On the other hand, if the price is considerably higher -- to balance supply versus demand -- how do you make it fair? Some people will necessarily be left out in the cold.

[danyoung]

The Nemo line is longer than it should be, because Jane is "supposed" to be in line for Space Mountain.

The problem with your virtual line analogy is that this virtual line created by FP is HOURS long, not the 30 or 40 minutes of the standby queue. A ride that can handle 1500 people per hour will still only allow that many people through whether FP is used or not. If 1500 people are in line, then it'll take them an hour to get through. But ther might be 6000 FP holders out there waiting for their turn, even if that turn is 3 or 4 hours away. They're not standing in the standby line taking up a space. The allocation of how many people from each line to get through is determined by Disney. And I'm sure they adjust it to find the balance between FP's selling out quickly and the length of the standby line. And it seems to work pretty well.

[Phonedave]

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

I never said I agree (or for that matter disagree) with it . I just now understand the argument that TDLFAN is trying to make.

-dave

[KevinYee]

The problem with your virtual line analogy is that this virtual line created by FP is HOURS long, not the 30 or 40 minutes of the standby queue. A ride that can handle 1500 people per hour will still only allow that many people through whether FP is used or not. If 1500 people are in line, then it'll take them an hour to get through. But ther might be 6000 FP holders out there waiting for their turn, even if that turn is 3 or 4 hours away. They're not standing in the standby line taking up a space.

Ah, but what I see happening is that those FP returnees are given priority (the mix is usually 70/30 or 80/20 in favor of FP over standby), and that makes the standby line go slower and take longer. This is all a part of a refutation of that one point that "the line w/o FP moves twice as fast but is twice as long." My larger point, in other words, is that FP does indeed make the standby experience longer, especially as this gets reproduced throughout the park. You have two Jane Smiths in line. There's no getting around that.

Put another way: you're right that the ride capacity doesn't change. If Jane Smith saves ANY time by using FP, that means in a zero-sum world that someone else is waiting longer.

[danyoung]

Ah, but what I see happening is that those FP returnees are given priority (the mix is usually 70/30 or 80/20 in favor of FP over standby), and that makes the standby line go slower and take longer.

I'll admit that my 50/50 numbers were off the top of my head. But as I've said repeatedly, the standby lines that we have now are no longer, time wise, than they used to be before FP. There are less people in line, and the line does move slower. But I haven't seen the times radically increase as TDLFAN has attested. I admit that my knowledge on this front is mostly from my own limited exposure to the situation twice a year, and usually during off-peak times. But I've read enough comments from others to feel that I'm not that far off base.

If Jane Smith saves ANY time by using FP, that means in a zero-sum world that someone else is waiting longer.

No, it doesn't. It means that someone will still have to wait in the 60 minute standby line THAT WAS 60 MINUTES LONG BEFORE FP! It moves slower, and there are less people in line, but it's still the same wait (or close to it). But now the person has the option to completely blow off the standby line and make use of the FP system. Why people don't see that as a winning situation continues to be beyond me.

[flynnibus]

End result... my Disney vacations have been better since FP has come around.

Sorry for you that show up at the park at 3pm that Space Mountain is a longer wait for you. For others, the net gain from the day is well worth it.

My only dig is the system could even be so much better yet if Disney played their cards correctly instead of placating to the whiners of the world. Enforce return times and you could give out even more FPs and manage throughput even better.

[KevinYee]

But now the person has the option to completely blow off the standby line and make use of the FP system. Why people don't see that as a winning situation continues to be beyond me.

Some don't see it as a winning solution because it's not a winning solution for every person at the park, in practice. The reason has to do with your first sentence quoted here. In practice, a good chunk of folks do not know they have the option to make use of the FP system (just hang out in the standby line sometimes and eavesdrop). And many of those who do know do not know that they would need to "maximize" their use of FP in today's world, or else they will end up waiting in longer lines, including those which have no FP machines at all. In effect, you either become a FP commando, or you go on fewer rides for the day*

* When compared to say 1996, which was pre-FastPass.

Thus, since there are ignorant people and half-ignorant people in the park, the portion of the day's audience actually using FP to its fullest potential is only a minority. Since only a minority is using it fully, that means the "return time" is reasonable, and the FP machines don't "run out" by noon.

Contrast that with Tokyo Disneyland, where for some reason (culture or marketing, who knows), everyone seems to know to use FP fully. The FP machines *do* run out very quickly.

My main contention is that FP only generates a benefit right now because there are ignorant users and half-ignorant users. If everyone became a FP commando, you'd see the machines run out quickly and return times go to the evening very very fast. And you'd see Standby lines get very long. Again, a visit to TDL will illustrate the point.

Or you could look back into history. When FP was introduced in 1999/2000, very few people took advantage of it. Those FP commandos got on 20-30 rides per day. Each year that goes by, more and more people from the general population hear from friends/relatives that they have to use FP when they visit, so the FP commandos can get less and less done. In other words, at the moment we have an unequal playing field (in this case, on the issue of "knowledge"). Granted, making FP for fee would still be unequal, but then it would be "wealth" (which was how the system worked under Walt Disney. Having no FP at all would reward "patience", or perhaps "desire to see this blasted attraction no matter how long I have to wait!" My view is that tourists benefit the most from that scenario.

[flynnibus]

In effect, you either become a FP commando, or you go on fewer rides for the day*

* When compared to say 1996, which was pre-FastPass.

I don't agree with this at all. In the days of 60-90min waits all the time.. we'd spend way more time trying to finish off a park. Even EPCOT with its massive people eating FW attractions waits of an hour or more were the norm.

My main contention is that FP only generates a benefit right now because there are ignorant users and half-ignorant users. If everyone became a FP commando, you'd see the machines run out quickly and return times go to the evening very very fast. And you'd see Standby lines get very long. Again, a visit to TDL will illustrate the point.

Yes, when you don't control the system, its going to be a nightmare. Use the system as its designed to work, and you could give out nearly all your capacity via FP and guests would still get a better experience because rides would be operating at max capacities with little waiting in line. Stand-by then is used to simply fill spots where FP returners are missing (the usual percent of FP people that don't return)... hence the name... stand-by.

The problem becomes when you try to give out most of your capacity via FP - but then don't plan your capacity (by not enforcing return times).

Even in the broken state Disney operates FP now - riders still benefit - no need to be a commando. Doing something like prioritizing to go get a FP is no different then going to ride Peter Pan first thing because it gets so crowded, etc. Even before FP you strategically did things early/late to avoid crowds.

In other words, at the moment we have an unequal playing field (in this case, on the issue of "knowledge"). Granted, making FP for fee would still be unequal, but then it would be "wealth" (which was how the system worked under Walt Disney. Having no FP at all would reward "patience", or perhaps "desire to see this blasted attraction no matter how long I have to wait!" My view is that tourists benefit the most from that scenario.

That last line makes no sense. By that logic waiting longer due to any factor (including FP) rewards 'patience'.

And the analogy to ticket books does not hold either. Charging more for higher grade tickets was not an aim to limit demand for those attractions - when in fact most of the time those attractions were some of the highest capacity attractions and lower tickets often were smaller capacity (and had more tickets out there for them). Tickets were about revenue for value.

In this discussion, money is being suggested as a way to limit FP use. A dead-end arguement to me... its not free vs pay that makes people want to use FP. It's the value they get. They see value in it, they will pay for it. Paying will not cap usage - only putting limits on its use will cap usage.

[danyoung]

Kevin, I know we probably won't ever see eye to eye on this. But I am enjoying the discussion!

In practice, a good chunk of folks do not know they have the option to make use of the FP system

I simply have a hard time believing this. I keep saying that it's not rocket science. The first time someone stands in line and watches FP'ers zipping by them, they better be asking who those folks are and how do I get that privilege. The only total FP novices are the first time, first day visitors. And just about anyone can learn the system in a reasonable time and start taking advantage of it.

If everyone became a FP commando, you'd see the machines run out quickly and return times go to the evening very very fast. And you'd see Standby lines get very long.

Y'know, I don't have any problem with the FP times going later. It's the same as pre-FP days - you gotta get there early to not have to stand in a long long line. Now, you gotta get there somewhat early to get a FP with a good time on it. Net gain - now I don't have to stand in that long long line at all. And I've always thought line length is somewhat self-regulating. While a new hot attraction like Soarin' will warrant 90 minute lines, you'll never see that again on Pirates or the HM, as it's just not worth it to people to stand in a line that long. Standby lines will be reasonably close in length of time to what they were without FP.

Having no FP at all would reward "patience", or perhaps "desire to see this blasted attraction no matter how long I have to wait!" My view is that tourists benefit the most from that scenario.

In my view, there is NO attraction that's worth a 60 minute wait or longer, unless it's brand new and this is my only chance to see it. And I was that way long before FP - I just don't like waiting in the long lines. I'd rather skip an attraction and catch it next time. Now, I don't have to wait in those long lines at all, cuz I can get a FP. And if it's a popular attraction and FP's go early, then I need to get there in the morning, get my FP, and come back later. It's a bit of scheduling that I'm more than happy to make if it gets me out of that 60 minute queue. And I think the tourists benefit by having the choice.

[KevinYee]

Where I sense we could all (jointly) find some common ground is ways to *fix* the system without junking it.

1. Radically limit how many FP tickets are given out per day. At most, only have 50% of what's available now.

2. Enforce time limits and old-day tickets via barcode. Sorry, Charlie.

3. Find the intestinal fortitude to make FP holders actually wait 10-15 minutes, and adjust the mix at the merge point to be 50/50 rather than 80/20. All the time.

4. Add freaking capacity to the parks. Did you know Disneyland has lost probably 15 or even 25% of its ride capacity since the 1980s? Ride capacity, as much as FP, has really diminished the experience. Ditto the other parks, with some exceptions like DHS (which has added rides to its anemic 1989 lineup)

[flynnibus]

Where I sense we could all (jointly) find some common ground is ways to *fix* the system without junking it.

Yup - that's my biggest gripe - people thinking the whole thing has got to go. I don't think that at all.

1. Radically limit how many FP tickets are given out per day. At most, only have 50% of what's available now.

Personally I think this is a lose-lose scenario. Here's why

- people would experience the frustration that FPs are 'out' even more often
- without enforcement of the rules, you'd still have the complaints about FP slowing the stand-by line and the problem of uneven loads causing more waits

Basically you have a perk that very few people would get to enjoy and would lead to even more 'commando' tactics to try to get what little is available. Basically you'd reduce the impact on stand-by, but only by reducing the benefits of having FP at all. You are adding more 'fighting for availability' to your Disney vacation... which if you notice is a common complaint across many topics.. such as the 180 ADRs, availability of adhoc dining, etc etc.

2. Enforce time limits and old-day tickets via barcode. Sorry, Charlie.

Sans the barcodes - I think this is the best solution. Because it

- gives true control back to Disney - they can adapt the system to refine any impacts and adjusting to guest feedback
- its the only solution that allows you to address the point of 'FPs running out' by actually allowing MORE FPs to be distributed because you can actually control their usage
- it removes complaints of abuse
- it removes the gains from using 'commando' tactics, bringing calm back to the whole thing
- it brings balance by limiting the gains someone can achieve over the less in the know.. it levels the playing field
- its the only model that allows FP to actually migrate to attractions that may use 'reservation only' modes where stand-by becomes like the single rider lines today.. only to fill in the gaps

barcode readers at the queue would be good for one thing.. data. But I think there are cheaper more economical ways of gathering that data. For instance, tickets could be timestamped and later used for data mining in bulk. This would remove any problems of delay at the 'gate' and infrastructure while still allowing the advantage of data mining the results.

Barcodes are not NEEDED at the gate until counterfeiting becomes a real issue. I'm sorry, if you don't think a CM can't know the current time and add +1 to a number - then there is no way possible I want people that STUPID running an attraction that has the possibility to kill someone. The grouper has to do way more complex thinking and people are not complaining about their throughput on a daily basis.

Find the intestinal fortitude to make FP holders actually wait 10-15 minutes, and adjust the mix at the merge point to be 50/50 rather than 80/20. All the time.

This is attempting to address a byproduct.. not a root cause problem. The root cause problem this would try to address is too many people in the FP line at once while the other line is expecting to go. The root cause to solve here is that you have two big lines with similar expectations rather then one big and one small. That is also why the 50/50 split alone is not a good solution. Eventually you just end up with two lines... what good is that? The merge problem is a function of volume of people and rate. You can't solve the perceived speed problem with only one side of that.

4. Add freaking capacity to the parks. Did you know Disneyland has lost probably 15 or even 25% of its ride capacity since the 1980s? Ride capacity, as much as FP, has really diminished the experience. Ditto the other parks, with some exceptions like DHS (which has added rides to its anemic 1989 lineup)

While this would help - I question if it would silence the FP-haters. People are complaining about the 'speed' of the lines not the total wait.. which in DL especially (the center of the FP hater universe) wait times are rarely over 90mins.. 60mins is a long wait there typically.

[disneyfann121]

While there are some people who are ignorant of the FP system, it's not as if FPs are a state secret. Anyone can inform himself in minutes; there is nothing elitist about FPs.

Also, it annoys me when FP haters try to pretend that there is some kind of war going on between FP users and people in the standby line. You know why this is bogus? Because, for the most part, "standby people" and "fastpass people" are one and the same! People in the standby line for attraction A are usually holding a fastpass for attraction B, and waiting for it to become valid. The most prolific FP users still have to get into many standby lines -- unless they really want to spend that much time in the shops and restaurants.

[DocDar]

You know what i find odd is Joe Tourist still seems to think you have to pay for fastpasses. And yea in the beginning i used to stockpile fastpasses and it workd many times, but then soon the CMs started to pay more attention and got stopped a few times. Although i haven't tried recently..