Originally Posted By Elderp "With these there’s a point at which supply for a good or service meets its adequate demand (forgot what the term is called), " I think the word you were looking for was equilibrium, which is exactly what DL would lose if they went back to the pay-per-use method. Other parks like MM and KBF would price them out and then DL would really think. Disney needs to continue on steady reliable growth.
Originally Posted By CMM1 Fastpass and Unlimited Fastpass options, Early Entries and E-ticket Nights (in Florida) have made things complicated enough already - Disney doesn't need to add any more technology to the ticketing and/or admissions aspects of the parks. Better to spend money on better attractions in each park that keeps crowds balanced out and guests happy.
Originally Posted By seannbecca I too am confounded by the anti-AP movement, and I am, frankly, scared by it. While I respect and enjoy the works of Fab (in mostly a "ghost" position, I rarely post - for fear of spammers), I am disheartened by her article promoting the "Smart Card" system and seemlingly sincere distaste for AP holders. Oh, Fab, please say it ain't so. . . Let me give you my side of the AP story. I live in Las Vegas. I'm a school teacher. I married my high school sweetheart when I was 18 and we have three kids (ages 6, 8 and 12). We love Disneyland with fantastic passion. We love and respect it's history and the vision of Walt. It is our salvation through the hardships of life. It is a benchmark to make it past tough times (this month might be bad, but next month we get to visit DL). School teachers in Nevada do not have a fantastic annual income. It was a struggle to visit Disneyland even for one day a year on my salary. We discovered, through the AP's, that we could actually visit Disneyland more than once a year. With the AP's (once they were paid for), all we had to worry about is paying for a hotel room and food. We drive (we can't afford to fly) and we find cheap rooms and share a bed with one of our kids, but we have a wonderful time everytime we visit. We actually have a "Disneyland Bank" in our house where we put in spare change to save up for our next AP's. We scrape every cent we can together. We don't go out to dinner, we don't go out to movies. We truly struggle to save to pay for those passes. The idea that is being promoted would destroy our ability to visit the park as we do now. I doubt that we would have the heart to go even once a year with the knowledge that we couldn't return within a month or so to have our "fix." I could care less about food discounts or special offers. My discount, my special offer, is the ability to visit our "second home" more than once every other year without going bankrupt in the process. We would not be able to sing along in the Tiki Room, find Maynard, buy fudge in Frontier land or listen to and critique yet another ride on the Jungle Cruise. Perhaps there are AP holders who are not respectful of the park. I don't know. My kids have been taught at a very early age to display the proper decorum within the boundaries of the park (my children often tell people on rides not to take flash pictures or stick their hands into the waters of POTC). To state it in a blunt manner, I doubt the jerk who cuts in line, makes rude comments during rides, leaves chicken bones along the parade routes and smokes in the wrong place is an AP holder. I've seen the money spent in the parks, and I doubt that the AP's are the burden upon which the lack of innovation can be placed. I'm sure the Imagineers (my true heroes) were excited about the TECHNOLOGY of a Smart Card. But, the core of the idea seems to be a concept destined to ruin the freedom and unity of the Magic Kingdom ("Sorry kids, we cannot afford to go on Pirates today. . ."). Walt nearly went bankrupt to create Snow White. Walt nearly went bankrupt again to create Disneyland. Disneyland was almost lost due to the large budget of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. It is not a matter of saving money or raising more money to create and refurbish rides. It is a matter of someone with the guts to spend a large portion of the profits to create a new vision. Walt knew, in both cases, that the financial risk would result in a great monetary reward in the future. Please, understand that not all AP holders are evil doers. Some of us are families that depend on the hope and dreams of holding a card that proclaims we are true lovers of Disneyland. FYI, I'm the guy that wrote the "Tribute to Maynard" article on Intercot West. We really love him (unfortunately, my diatribe was awarded the title "Tribute to Maynard" and many folks assumed he was dead . . . sorry, not my fault). Fab, I really love your stuff and hope to meet you one day. I hope this gives you another view on the topic. All of you ADD folks, keep up the good fight and dream the impossible! Sean C. Jones "I never let my schoolin'interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
Originally Posted By Shooba "The longer the line, the more it would cost to get on. With the idea that you get folks to go to attractions with shorter or no lines. " Similarily, I can see them charging (for example) $4 for Space Mountain OR $6 for Space Mountain via the Fastpass line. Could definately create a "class" system which would likely be a bad thing.
Originally Posted By Shooba "I too am confounded by the anti-AP movement, and I am, frankly, scared by it." At the risk of getting off topic, you're (probably) the ideal passholder. Instead of being able to afford an annual visit, you get to go several times, and subsequently spend more per year than you would otherwise. You win and Disney wins. The problems with the AP program (from what I've read) are people who use it to babysit their kids every day by dropping them off, people who go 50 times per year and spend nothing, etc. The program probably needs some tweaking, but banning APs outright sounds foolish.
Originally Posted By JeffG This idea has been circulating for a while. Here is a link to a 1998 thread from alt.disney.disneyland that covered most of these same topics: <a href="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=yoda-ya02408000R1302980035190001" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/group s?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=yoda-ya02408000R1302980035190001</a>%40nntp.lanminds.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dsmart%2Bcard%2Bgroup:alt.disney.disneyland%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3Dyoda-ya02408000R1302980035190001%2540nntp.lanminds.com%26rnum%3D1 I think there are some both within the company and within the fan community that really want to see a return to the old ticket system, mainly based on the premise that assigning prices to rides might encourage building more of them. What I'm much less sure of is that there is much market/business support for such an idea. -Jeff
Originally Posted By DisneyFreak96 I see major problems with SmartCards. I will need to know how much I have left on it before I get on each attraction so I'll know if I have enough credits, right? Which means everytime I go in line I am reminded of the amount of money (or lack thereof) I have. Generally being conscience of this makes people spend less...not more. On my last visit I heard a lot of regular visitors(no APers) say 'we can't go on that, we don't have a fastpass' while pointing to the standby line. Will this be replaced by "we can't go on that, we don't have the credits'?
Originally Posted By FigmentMI There are so many flaws in this concept as presented in Fab's article that you could write a book (ok, perhaps a pamphlet). I feel compelled to mention a few. First off, this idea that attractions "don't make money" or that they can't track the amount of money that attractions make for the park is ludicrous. Attractions are what people pay to get into the park for. Simply total the gate receipts and that's how much money the attractions generated for the park. Then you take the turnstile counts to determine which portion of that total is generated by each attraction, and from that portion subtract the operational and maintenence costs. That's how much profit each attraction made for the park. I'd be shocked if a similar calculation isn't done already. So, what's the real reason to monetize the rides? Same as always, to make more money. After all, if they implemented this system and didn't make more money from it (especially considering the considerable infrastructure, maintenence and man-hour costs of operating this system) it would be a failure. The only result of this change would be jacking up prices without looking like they're jacking up prices. I think the true motivation for this idea would be feedback that ticket prices are quickly reaching an "upper limit" beyond which people would see as price-prohibitve. Using smart cards would remove the up-front sticker-shock, but would (if it worked) encourage people to spend money. It essentially sets up more of an impulse-buying arrangement. People will be encouraged, especially after a day's worth of excitement and fun, to throw an extra $20 on their smart cards that they might not be willing to pay up front on an admission ticket. Now, about the $5 cost that Fab mentioned for an E ticket. Think about that for a minute: Half (or more) of the cost of a movie ticket for at MOST 20 minutes of entertainment, and that's assuming a Pirates-length ride which isn't really done any more. It's more like 3-6 minutes these days. Not a great value for your dollar is it? I'm not saying that people wouldn't pay it, but personally I think it's just nuts. The idea that it would help with crowd control is also seriously flawed. Charging per-attraction discourages riding, which means more people on the walkways. And if less people come to the park because of these changes, that means prices have to go up to make them worthwhile. What they really want is for as many people as possible to be in the park spending as much money as possible. They want to reduce the _appearance_ that the park is crowded, and I don't think this change would factor into that if it worked as planned. The only way attractions will make a comeback is for someone to realize that they have equal or greater return on investment compared to the shops and restaurants. Monetizing the attractions won't do that, in fact it may focus people's attention even more on the bottom-line costs associated with the attractions rather than their intrinsic value. Do you really think a labor and resource intensive ride can compete with a table of plushes for making profits? Until someone realizes that the attractions ARE the brand when it comes to the theme parks, no amount of creative accounting is going to bring them back to their glory days. All this system will do is make us pay more for less value. Figment
Originally Posted By arstogas Excellent, Figment. Thanks for posting your thoughts. I think this is just more meddlesome thinking from people that have to justify their existence in a job position, by postulating concepts for change that are based on very flawed and misconceived presuppositions. In other words, a lot of blather from pretenders who are worried about losing their jobs if they don't suggest SOMETHING, however inane.
Originally Posted By Britain Good points, Figment. Especially about this being a way to get around that $50 sticker shock. That being said, if I bought an admission card that includes 1000 points up front, then I don't mind spending them where I will. I don't like Alien Encounter (or rather I didn't, since now it's gone), and I don't like SuperStar Limo (once again, didn't). How can I make a statement that I want these attractions replaced? Vote with the pocket books, right? Not with the current system! If I buy a ticket to DCA, then that gets distributed all over, and if Disney is not completely honest with their polling (as has recently been discussed) no one in management will think twice about the fact that I love half and hate half of DCA. They got all my money either way.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy There are turnstile counters on each attraction. They give details of which are busier than others. What turnstiles don't tell them is how many attractions a particular person goes on in a day, and which ones. A SmartCard mechanism would allow that. And it doesn't have to know who you are in particular, probably just a zipcode. A SmartCard mechanism, even if there were unlimited rides like now, would be helpful for generating rider stats and demographics for each attraction.
Originally Posted By JeffG Based on past discussions on this idea, I really doubt that it is the management/marketing types that are promoting it or even seriously considering it. I suspect this idea is coming more from Imagineering and other creative types that are seeking a way to try and create a more direct perception that attractions are as much a profit center as merchandise and food service. While the first impression would likely be that a smart-card system like this would increase revenues by having guests pay for each attraction, it seems much less likely when looked at more closely. The important point to keep in mind is that attractions are not truly free in the current unlimited passport system. Instead, guests are simply paying up-front for them. At least in theory, the idea is to set the admission price to best reflect the average number of attractions a guest would typically get to experience. With a smart-card system, they certainly would have to lower the entrance fee pretty dramatically. While they could keep the entrance fee at a similar level and heavily "pre-load" the smart-card, that would pretty much make the whole thing rather pointless. A pay-as-you-go system like this replaces that up-front flat-fee payment to a variable one. Some will probably pay more, but some will also pay less. There is a fair chance that more people will pay the lower amount. A system like this could also impact sales on food and merchandise, since there would be a perception that more money would need to be budgeted to attractions. With the current system, people are probably less apt to think about the fact that they are still paying for the attractions as well. I'm sure that all kinds of pricing options are always being evaluated and considered within the company. I have a hard time believing that this one is getting very serious consideration. -Jeff
Originally Posted By CaptainLurk “I think this is just more meddlesome thinking from people that have to justify their existence in a job position, by postulating concepts for change that are based on very flawed and misconceived presuppositions. In other words, a lot of blather from pretenders who are worried about losing their jobs if they don't suggest SOMETHING, however inane.†If you’re looking for discussion and not just ranting, then please stick to the topic and debate the pros and cons of the idea. Don’t speculate if these people are “pretenders†or “trying to justify their existenceâ€. Those are unwarranted personal attacks.
Originally Posted By arstogas >>>If you’re looking for discussion and not just ranting, then please stick to the topic and debate the pros and cons of the idea. Don’t speculate if these people are “pretenders†or “trying to justify their existenceâ€. Those are unwarranted personal attacks. <<< No, they're not. They're deductions based on precedent, hardly qualify as rants (check Al's site for those) and those comments are DIRECTLY related to the topic at hand, namely, some of the ins and outs pertaining to the article Fab posted. The manner of people WHO proposed this system, goes specifically to the credibility OF the proposals. And believe me, this sort of thing is RIFE in the entertainment community, if not in other industries as well. >>>What turnstiles don't tell them is how many attractions a particular person goes on in a day, and which ones. A SmartCard mechanism would allow that.<<< Actually, if they wanted to accomplish this NOW, they could easily do so, with existing ticket media. Using technology similar to those little key fobs dispensed to customers of SHELL and other gas companies, and the more sophisticated stuff coming to grocery stores soon, they could easily just detect individual's riding habits from a little strip sandwiched into a ticket.
Originally Posted By Park Hopper For most of the reasons already listed, I don’t think smart cards are the way to go. It seems to me the issue is paying for these new expensive E ticket (coupon) attractions. Why don’t they keep the all-inclusive admission ticket and just put a separate admission charge on the new attractions? When Indiana Jones first opened, I’d have paid $5.00 to ride it. I may even have ridden it twice. You pay your money, you ride the new thing, and then you go enjoy the rest of your day at Disneyland. Keep charging the $5.00 for a couple of years until the attraction pays for itself and then add it to calendar of attractions covered by the all-inclusive ticket. Hopefully by then they will have a new attraction ready to take its place. I believe Walt did something similar with the Tiki Room. When it first opened, it required a separate ticket that was not included with the coupon books.
Originally Posted By schoolsinger Park Hopper, that idea reminds me of movies. It is a better value to buy a movie than to go to the theater. But many pay the cost to go to the theater because they are anxious to see the new movie now, instead of waiting for it to come on VHS or DVD.
Originally Posted By karlg One-price gets you everything is a very short sited and short lived advantage to the consumer. In the end there has to be a way to pay for everything or else you get poor product and shortages. The way you price things affects behavior in various ways. The one price buys everything looks great until you look at the consequences. Where else in America does one price buy you everything other than food buffets? What kind of car would you expect would be offered if they were all the same price? What would happen if the Grocery Store charged one-price per visit? But the prevailing feeling in this topic seems to be that one price buy’s all is a good thing. One price buy all may “seem good†but it usually does not work out very well in practice. Obviously this topic is “biased†in favor of people that are big fans of Disney Parks and tend to go a lot more than the average guest. People that have stopped going, aren’t likely to be visiting these boards. But what you can’t get from guest surveys is why people are NOT going to the park. For many people, particularly those form out of town, it is not the cost of the attractions that is keeping them away, it is the crowds and lack of really great attractions. First off, there is no “fair†pricing system. Every system is BIASed in favor of one group or another. The current Disneyland system is heavily biased against older people, people with a low tolerance for the more thrilling rides, people that don’t/can’t go as often, families on vacation, people that pay a lot to get to Disneyland and stay in hotels there. It is heavily biased in favor or people who’s time is not valuable, who are teenagers to about 30 years old, who are local, who go a lot (and know all the “rulesâ€), and don’t spend as much. Implied in a one price gets you all scheme is that somebody (most people) are going to get a LOT less than what they paid for. The people that go as a family with different ages get a poor value. An older person ends up paying just as much at a teenager that goes on all the big rides. Why maintain the park for people to enjoy the beauty of it, if the park is only geared to draw teenagers for rides? Why have rides that the WHOLE family can go on, if you make the same amount if they sit and wait for their kids? The current systems has resulted in no “E-Tickets†at DL for 10+ years, a very crowded park, and a bunch of 3rd rate attractions and a very lackluster design of DCA. You get a bunch of closed attractions with very few replacements. You get crowded parks with no good restaurants. Granted some of this could be attributed to greed and bad management. But at least a part of the problem is that the attractions are now loss-leaders for the stores, food, and merchandise DUE TO the one price gets all ticket. The park is now jammed from opening to closing with people trying to get their “money’s worth.†People go on rides again and again to get their “money’s worth.†Popular attractions have their Fastpasses run out early and have 2+ hour waits with lines full of people. DLR today in many ways the “unintended consequence†of the one price buys all system. Walt Disney is quoted as saying that he hated lines because they COST him money. The reason why is because he charged per attraction, the more attractions you got to go on, the more Disney made. Thus he wanted to have a lot attraction capacity. Today, what is the incentive to make lines shorter? It gets very hard to justify and correlate the length of lines to why people are not coming to the park (is it the economy, advertising, weather). For an out of town guest, TIME is now THE COST of the attractions. For a person from out of town that has left a reasonable paying job, they are giving up something like $50 to $100 per hour (cost to be there plus time off from work – the “opportunity costâ€) to wait in line. They may not rationalize it this way, but what they do is figure that DL is not “worth†visiting and the worth they are talking about is not the admission price but rather the TIME it takes. They don’t have the time to go on many attractions. They can’t afford 3 hours out of their vacation to compete for a good spot at Fantasmic with a bunch of teenagers or APs that are just palling around to see Fantasmic for the Nth time. They are not experienced enough to know all the tricks of the Fastpass system. For an out of town guest, DL is getting gridlocked with ever less to do every year and very little really new and unique to see. So they spend their dollars elsewhere and leave DL to the lower paying guests. In turn, Disney’s management sees not way they can justify building new and better attractions. It is so much “safer†to just squeeze costs.
Originally Posted By Shooba karlg, kudos on a very well written, intelligent post. I'm impressed how articulate many of the posts on LP can be.
