Possible update to Genie+

[tjkraz]

While I think your point is valid, a lot of people with younger kids need some spinner type attractions. A lot of the recent, "big" attractions all have height requirements. Galaxy's Edge needs at least one ride that doesn't have one. They don't all have to be as simplistic as Swirling Saucers, but those types of rides do serve a purpose.

Oh, no doubt. Part of the reason Slinky is so popular is the fact that a large % of attractions at DHS have higher height restrictions. Building a couple kid friendly attractions at DHS would help in certain areas. However:

- The impact on wait times for thrill rides will be negligible
- More rides means more guests and longer visits

I WANT disney to build as much as possible. If nothing else, their motivation should be to grow attendance. But I don't see an obvious path to the utopic short wait times that some suggest would result if Disney would simply build more.

 

[BrianL]

Oh, no doubt. Part of the reason Slinky is so popular is the fact that a large % of attractions at DHS have higher height restrictions. Building a couple kid friendly attractions at DHS would help in certain areas. However:

- The impact on wait times for thrill rides will be negligible
- More rides means more guests and longer visits

I WANT disney to build as much as possible. If nothing else, their motivation should be to grow attendance. But I don't see an obvious path to the utopic short wait times that some suggest would result if Disney would simply build more.

No, this is true. More high level attractions are going to attract more guests too. They will need to extend operating hours, and at some point, add a park.

 

[Jrb1979]

No, this is true. More high level attractions are going to attract more guests too. They will need to extend operating hours, and at some point, add a park.

They should do that but we all know it's not going to happen until Iger is gone. Extending hours won't happen when they can sell the parks twice a day.

 

[AnnabelleTheTalkingTree]

Oh, no doubt. Part of the reason Slinky is so popular is the fact that a large % of attractions at DHS have higher height restrictions. Building a couple kid friendly attractions at DHS would help in certain areas. However:

- The impact on wait times for thrill rides will be negligible
- More rides means more guests and longer visits

I WANT disney to build as much as possible. If nothing else, their motivation should be to grow attendance. But I don't see an obvious path to the utopic short wait times that some suggest would result if Disney would simply build more.

Agree 100% with this. Disney isn't going to spend money on new builds just to keep attendance/sales static. IF they are building, the goal is to spend money to make money. New attractions = more guests. More people who want to see what's new and novel. Same with park expansions - as much as I love to see what Disney comes up with next, I don't fool myself into imagining that the parks will feel LESS crowded once they're done. If/when they do this expansion behind BTMR, park capacity increases along with the square footage. All that means is more people they can cram in there.

 

[AnnabelleTheTalkingTree]

No, this is true. More high level attractions are going to attract more guests too. They will need to extend operating hours, and at some point, add a park.

I'd love to see a new park, but I'm not sure a new park will do anything to disperse crowds. It would actually entire MORE people to come, thus FILLING the new park in addition to the older parks. Crowd levels in other parks would likely just remain fairly static.

I mean, I'm a prime example. Haven't been to Universal Studios in 10 years, despite being a pretty big HP fan. With Epic Universe opening, I'm much more interested in heading over there again once it opens. Epic Universe is probably enough to entice LOTS of people like me - who haven't been in forever (or ever). I'm sure lots non-regular US guests will come out in droves to check out the new spectacle. Meanwhile all the regulars keep going. So, yeah, US is getting a new park, but they'll also be drumming up enough new guests to FILL that new park in addition to the existing ones. Same would go for Disney, I imagine.

 

[BrianL]

I'd love to see a new park, but I'm not sure a new park will do anything to disperse crowds. It would actually entire MORE people to come, thus FILLING the new park in addition to the older parks. Crowd levels in other parks would likely just remain fairly static.

I mean, I'm a prime example. Haven't been to Universal Studios in 10 years, despite being a pretty big HP fan. With Epic Universe opening, I'm much more interested in heading over there again once it opens. Epic Universe is probably enough to entice LOTS of people like me - who haven't been in forever (or ever). I'm sure lots non-regular US guests will come out in droves to check out the new spectacle. Meanwhile all the regulars keep going. So, yeah, US is getting a new park, but they'll also be drumming up enough new guests to FILL that new park in addition to the existing ones. Same would go for Disney, I imagine.

Teh bump in attendance should be outstripped by the new park's capacity. That is theoretcally of course - if they build 80,000 new hotel rooms on-site, that might eat it up pretty fast!

 

[DisFanDad]

Not necessarily. They need more attractions on the level of Dumbo. They also need to stop marketing every new attraction as the next best thing. They don't need more top attractions, they need smaller ones to fill out the parks.

The premise is wrong as well - to some extent at least - Attendance at MK (according to the Theme Park Association) was down 3 Million from pre-pandemic, 15% lower. Disney has also noted this in some investor calls - Revenue growth lower attendance, lower costs, higher per customer spending. Literally fewer people in the queues, longer wait times and worse experience at a higher price. WDW is doing this to themselves.

 

[DisFanDad]

I'd love to see a new park, but I'm not sure a new park will do anything to disperse crowds. It would actually entire MORE people to come, thus FILLING the new park in addition to the older parks. Crowd levels in other parks would likely just remain fairly static.

I mean, I'm a prime example. Haven't been to Universal Studios in 10 years, despite being a pretty big HP fan. With Epic Universe opening, I'm much more interested in heading over there again once it opens. Epic Universe is probably enough to entice LOTS of people like me - who haven't been in forever (or ever). I'm sure lots non-regular US guests will come out in droves to check out the new spectacle. Meanwhile all the regulars keep going. So, yeah, US is getting a new park, but they'll also be drumming up enough new guests to FILL that new park in addition to the existing ones. Same would go for Disney, I imagine.

But the regulars wont keep going - EPIC is a great example, you are right EPIC is enticing - I am a regular, so is most of my family, we are all looking at Universal Trips in the next few years (once EPIC opens) we aren't ADDING vacation days, we are switching vacation days. If WDW added a park, we wouldn't go from 10 day trips to 13 day trips to add 3 days in the new park - we would spend fewer days in MK, AK, EPCOT and HS. There might be a short term bump in overall attendance, but it will be short term and will not outpace the added capacity of the new park. So the overall impact, especially in the medium to long term - would be to lower crowds everywhere else.

But again - this sidesteps the point that attendance at WDW is DOWN - considerably - and we are still having issues, there are other causal factors beyond crowds.

 

[Jwaire]

The last thing they need is a new park. Animal Kingdom and EPCOT both have a ton of expansion pads that haven't even been used.

The bigger problem for Disney is finding what works in their parks. Not all their IP investments have been a success. They love to tout Pandora, but it only gave AK a temporary bump that's faded away according to the current TEA numbers.

I don't care how much money they're making off Genie+, a 35% drop in attendance (from 2019) at Animal Kingdom for the revenge travel year of 2022 has to sting. It's going to be even worse for 2023 based on summer attendance numbers.

 

[Upatnoon]

Disney has moved to the lower crowds, more profits approach.

You can reduce prices to pack the parks, but if guests are miserable because they have to wait in lines for everything, that is a loser strategy.

Consider how much energy is expended on this forum from people seeking "lower crowds." People complain about Genie+, but buy it anyway instead of waiting in line.

There is no question that Animal Kingdom needs some fresh attractions.

Pandora opened in 2017 and that is the last major improvement. It may not get it for a while, though.

With a super-tight labor market, I suspect Disney just wants to finish Epcot and the MK stuff before moving to upgrade that park.

 

[DisFanDad]

The last thing they need is a new park. Animal Kingdom and EPCOT both have a ton of expansion pads that haven't even been used.

The bigger problem for Disney is finding what works in their parks. Not all their IP investments have been a success. They love to tout Pandora, but it only gave AK a temporary bump that's faded away according to the current TEA numbers.

I don't care how much money they're making off Genie+, a 35% drop in attendance (from 2019) at Animal Kingdom for the revenge travel year of 2022 has to sting. It's going to be even worse for 2023 based on summer attendance numbers.

It's crazy to me people keep talking about "the crowds" and how "people just keep going" etc etc - like, attendance is WAY down people - if you need any proof of how disney is manipulating things, running rides at lower capacity, shortening park hours, etc, quite literally giving you LESS for more money - its right there. You keep seeing increased wait times / "crowds" but attendance is actually down by millions.

 

[Minnie1222]

While I can't confirm or deny Disney's "inflated wait times", I can see that our trip is much better with G+ and iLL. Just for fun I looked into joining the afternoon Tron's VQ and saw the estimated return time was 354 minutes. Even if Disney inflated the time by 2 hours, there was no way I'm going to hang around MK for another 4 hours in the heat. Rise was 95 min, and the length of the queue appeared to reflect the posted wait time.

 

[New Mouse]

While I can't confirm or deny Disney's "inflated wait times", I can see that our trip is much better with G+ and iLL. Just for fun I looked into joining the afternoon Tron's VQ and saw the estimated return time was 354 minutes. Even if Disney inflated the time by 2 hours, there was no way I'm going to hang around MK for another 4 hours in the heat. Rise was 95 min, and the length of the queue appeared to reflect the posted wait time.

So you've basically confirmed that Disney has convinced you it's worth paying for a product that exists because they have created wait times that didn't previously exist at these levels!

 

[Guest Mode]

While I can't confirm or deny Disney's "inflated wait times", I can see that our trip is much better with G+ and iLL. Just for fun I looked into joining the afternoon Tron's VQ and saw the estimated return time was 354 minutes. Even if Disney inflated the time by 2 hours, there was no way I'm going to hang around MK for another 4 hours in the heat. Rise was 95 min, and the length of the queue appeared to reflect the posted wait time.

So you've basically confirmed that Disney has convinced you it's worth paying for a product that exists because they have created wait times that didn't previously exist at these levels!

I'm taking the post from @Minnie1222 as saying, I don't like standing in long lines or waiting! So, if I have an option to avoid it I'm happy to be able to take that option, even if it means paying a nominal fee for an upgraded experience. I agree. We all pay for upgraded experiences all the time in life, especially with vacation/leisure experiences. It's optional, but it makes the experience better. Your choice!

 

[Jwaire]

It's crazy to me people keep talking about "the crowds" and how "people just keep going" etc etc - like, attendance is WAY down people - if you need any proof of how disney is manipulating things, running rides at lower capacity, shortening park hours, etc, quite literally giving you LESS for more money - its right there. You keep seeing increased wait times / "crowds" but attendance is actually down by millions.

Add to that reduced dining and entertainment that are people eaters including parades and shows, high capacity attractions that are closed like Mermaid and now Splash Mountain, restaurants that are seating at reduced capacity or only offering prix fixe menus, recreation options that have been removed at the hotels, etc.

There's just less to do.

 

[Minnie1222]

So you've basically confirmed that Disney has convinced you it's worth paying for a product that exists because they have created wait times that didn't previously exist at these levels!

Disney doesn't need to convince me. I see the size of their queues with my own eyes and reaffirm myself that G+ and iLL are totally worth the cost.

 

[DisFanDad]

So you've basically confirmed that Disney has convinced you it's worth paying for a product that exists because they have created wait times that didn't previously exist at these levels!

Nailed it ... this is the con, and people just fall for it. Let alone the G+ is fundamentally no different than FP+ which used to be included in ticket price, now you pay extra AND the ticket costs more, and people will still be like "So glad they brought in G+"

 

[Guest Mode]

Nailed it ... this is the con, and people just fall for it. Let alone the G+ is fundamentally no different than FP+ which used to be included in ticket price, now you pay extra AND the ticket costs more, and people will still be like "So glad they brought in G+"

Some of us just want the best trip possible. We aren't overthinking it. We're just doing what works for us. Vacations are for having fun and relaxing. I don't care about the corporate money making strategy. I'll keep paying to play until it isn't satisfying anymore. Then I'll go somewhere else or stay home. Everyone is free to do the same.

 

[DLgal]

Nailed it ... this is the con, and people just fall for it. Let alone the G+ is fundamentally no different than FP+ which used to be included in ticket price, now you pay extra AND the ticket costs more, and people will still be like "So glad they brought in G+"

It really doesn't matter how things used to be. This is how things are in the parks NOW.

For me, Genie+ is absolutely worth it. It's not a great system. I basically hate it, but I'd much rather spend the money to skip several standby waits .

 

[Jwaire]

Nailed it ... this is the con, and people just fall for it. Let alone the G+ is fundamentally no different than FP+ which used to be included in ticket price, now you pay extra AND the ticket costs more, and people will still be like "So glad they brought in G+"

Last September, I had a family behind me that wanted to go on Jungle Cruise. I overheard the dad go, "Well I couldn't get that, but I got us Aladdin's Carpets."



The dad was so proud too, but all I could think about was $100+ extra for a family of four to possibly wait 10 (if that?) minutes less at The Magic Carpets of Aladdin. Same with Tea Cups, Nemo, Barnstormer, Living with the Land or Journey Into Imagination.

People are getting ripped off and none the wiser because you need a PHD to go to Disney anymore.