Fast Passes

TheHSBR said:
When a person buys a seat at a sporting event you know exactly what you are getting.

And with the purchase of only a general admission ticket to Cedar Point (or any park), you know exactly what you're getting. Want more? Purchase the general admission ticket and add on FOL access.

This analogy may be one of the worst Ive seen on this site and has nothing to do with this conversation.

Nah, not really. It's virtually a perfect example, and there are others:

When you go to a concert, you can choose to pay the lowest price for a ticket, and get crappy seats far away from the stage. Want to sit closer? Sure thing - just buy a more expensive ticket!

When you take a flight somewhere, you can choose to pay the lowest price for a ticket, and get cramped seats and peanuts. Want to have a more luxurious flight? Sure thing - just buy a more expensive ticket!

When you go to an amusement park, you can choose to pay the lowest price for park admission, and have to stand in long lines for attractions. Want to ride more? Sure thing - just buy a more expensive ticket!

Why would I need data to support observational evidence.

Because your "evidence" is highly suspect. All you've offered is that you think paid FOL access is sucky, and that parks who offer such a service are "offensive" and/or "prostituting" themselves. To me, it sounds like you simply dislike the system and are basing your view on emotion, rather than being objective & realistic.

...people throughout this site who have said this and many others in both my travels and on other boards who have echoed the same feelings.

And all I gather from this is hurt feelings on the part of enthusiasts.

For seemingly ever, enthusiasts had de-facto FOL access, to an extent, as we knew what days at what park would offer the shortest waits possible. Or we'd know that if you ride Coaster A early in the day, the line will be shorter than if you wait until later in the day. Put simply, enthusiast knowledge was currency we could exploit in order to maximize our ride time.

Now, parks have begun to offer the same advantages (short or non-existent waits), but the currency is no longer enthusiast knowledge, but instead actual currency. And for those of us who have an abundance of the former and a shortage of the latter, it can be frustrating to see our advantage slip away.

Willijs3 said:
The old Fastlane system worked well. Two hands, two rides. And it was free.

From all the anectdotal evidence that was available from the Fastlane era, it hardly worked well. It was quite possibly the most poorly put together fast pass system implemented by any park.

I have to agree that his analogy was a very bad one! Anyways, what I think TheHSBR means is, there needs to be some kind of change made to the system so it doesn't seem like the people who have the money for a FastPass are cheating and cutting everybody in line.

For example (in regards to a VIP tour guest): You're waiting in Millennium Force's line for 2.5 hours. You and your riding partner decide you want to experience what the front seat is like, which is going to be another 30mins. You guys are the next ones to get on and here comes the blue train rolling from the unload station to the load station and you see people who previously rode it sitting in your seats. You just blow it off and say "No big deal, we'll just wait one more train". The blue train finishes it's course while you're buckling yourself in the red train, and the ride goes down for an extended mechanical issue. That is what he is talking about when he says he feels offended when they ride over and over.

I agree that there should be a limited amount of times the Fast Pass users can come back and ride within an hour or something. It does get very irritating when you see people cutting ahead of you, just because they have the money to do so.

I'm all for a fast pass system, but I agree that the limits to the system need to be worked out carefully, to ensure a good balance of guest satisfaction.

I was fortunate enough to try out the system just a couple days after the new style was implemented at KI. No one really knew much about it yet, and hardly anyone was willing to pay. So, we were among the only Fast Lane users in the park.

The park was pretty packed for a weekday, and I would not have been able to show the first-timers in our group the whole park with 1-hour waits. With FL, we literally walked right on all the major rides without waiting, and it was highly satisfying. It was a win for the park, as not only did they get more money from us, but they changed the first timers' opinion of the park for the better while barely affecting the non-FL customers.

While we didn't abuse the system in any way, I quickly realized how much of a problem it could become if not handled with limits or higher-priced tiers of access.

Word of mouth spread about the excellent experiences with the system, and KI marketed the system more and more. Not surprisingly, Fast Lane and Fright Lane caught on very quickly.

Now some problems are starting to mount. While its mostly satisfactory, the system needs to be tweaked for the very-heavy-crowd days. I've heard reports of Fast Lane riders consuming entire trains after trains (and FL even having 30 minute waits), while the regular line isn't advancing...especially on low-capacity rides like Firehawk.

So, the park needs to limit the number of passes sold more, limit a set number of seats per ride cycle, or increase the price as more guests enter the park. They could have a stock ticker type screen as you enter the park, with the fluctuating Fast Pass prices... ;)

I think you're going out of your way to make an issue out of a non-issue.

King's Island has had paid FOL access for much of the season (offering unlimited rides), and given that the park has since added rides to the FOL roster seems to indicate that few, if any, non-FOL guest's days have been ruined as a result of the premium ticket.

And really, I don't get all the money-hate. Do you also feel offended when you see someone sitting close to the stage than you at a concert? I mean, how rude! They can see the stage better AND hear the music more clearly, and it's all because they have more money! Those bastards! ;)

Ffej said:
So, the park needs to limit the number of passes sold more, limit a set number of seats per ride cycle, or increase the price as more guests enter the park. They could have an stock ticker type screen as you enter the park, with the fluctuating Fast Pass prices... ;)

Yeah, I think that if such a system becomes more popular, it only makes sense to impose some limitations.

Dynamic pricing is one area that could work, as the parks already have a pretty good idea on how crowded the park will be on any given day. Make the mid-August FL ticket cost more, or limit the available rides during the peak season.

But really, I think that the best bet would be to limit rides, similar to how they do with VIP. If I can't ride, say, MF twice in a row, it's going to take me probably 15-20 minutes before I can get to another ride and back to MF, during which time several trains would (should) have cycled through the course, lowering the impact of my "evil" cutting. :)

DJ, it's clear that you and Jeff feel most of my posts are pointless, and you are perfectly entitled to that opinion. But you have followed every one of my recent posts with "you're making a mountain out of a mole hill," "you're making an issue out of a non-issue," "you're being melodramatic," etc...please refrain. If my posts are so pointless, why are you guys bothering to respond?

I actually just praised the Fast Lane system and pointed out 1 area that needs to be improved upon.

Apparently on one of the past Saturdays in October, Kings Island guests were told by staff that the wait for a haunted attraction would be 3+ hours, as the line wasn't advancing at all because of Fright Lane customers.

While you may feel that is making an issue out of a non-issue, I certainly do not. To me, that is an unacceptable way to deal with a fast pass system, no matter how often this situation occurs.

Thinking in the mindset of a regular customer that may have budgeted X amount of dollars for the KI trip, why would I want to return the following year if I had this experience?

Edit: DJ, you have me confused now. The quote and 2nd half of your previous post was not there when I made this one. Was the first part even directed at me?

Why don't they just make a rule that says when you ride something you can't ride it again until 1/2 the time posted at the front of the line. If Diamondback's line is 2.5 hours (like it was Saturday) then people who just rode it with the fast pass can't ride it again for another hour or so. It keeps groups from mobbing one ride for multiple rides, but still lets them ride whatever they want with really no wait.

I like that idea a lot ^. How will it work without having a ride host at entrance? Or do you not need anybody at entrance?

There will need to be some type of administration for such a system. VIP Tour rule that you cannot ride the same ride again before riding something else is enforced by the VIP tour guide. How do you manage the delayed re-ride time for FP holders?

Good question. If it's anything like a Special Access pass, the entrance host could write their boarding time on it or something

Or simply install scanners at the fast pass entryways. If a little park like Waldameer can do it, I'm sure the big boys at Cedar Fair could make it work.

Just because I'm all for it because I hope to fork out the cash and take advantage of it doesnt mean it's an automatic win for CP. Nor is it an automatic loss just because a few find it priced too high/unfair. They still have to put the right process in place. Personally, I think it should be priced high enough that only a small minority take advantage. I'd rather see KI's $50 than something like $15 that everyone basically "has" to get to enjoy the day. Secondly, there has to be a limitation somewhere. Someone laughing and re-riding over and over is going to upset guests, period. Whether it's a chip/scanner, only from 1 to 8 p.m., whatever it is, that's the biggest issue, IMO. In the end I'm all for them tackling the standing-in-line-for-hours issue. It'd be wonderful, be it fast pass or virtual queues, to enjoy the beautiful park, not the handrails.

Is Disney's fast pass system really complicated to put together or something? It seems to me like it works out great for me when I go to Disney. In my opinion, it is a great system. It limits the amount of fast pass tickets distributed between certain time periods to ovoid over flow. And it is also very fair to the non fast pass customers.

I just don't understand why Cedar Fair can't do that? Is it too high tech, or expensive?

I don't think the Disney fast pass system is too complicated or expensive. However, I don't think Cedar Point has the mix of attractions to make it work. Disney (i) has more guests who can go back to their hotel pool or are looking to shop, make dining a major part of their visit and (ii) has more shows/parades that are not really line based. What will people who get fast passes do at CP other than get in another line?

I'm not necessarily opposed to the various fast pass systems, but I think a majority of parks have done an awful job at integrating them. For example, SF Magic Mountain and Great Adventure (the only SF parks I've been to since their Flash Pass rolled out) both did terrible jobs in terms of managing the merge point between Flash Pass users and the regular queue. So much so that loading times on many rides appeared to at least double anytime there were Flash Pass users present.

I'm a bigger fan of systems like Kennywood and Universal (at least at HHN when I used theirs) where the pass gets you one entry per attraction per day and are pretty well integrated in how they merge those users into the regular queue. I'd rather see that kind of system at KI.

As for CP, in my opinion there are only a few days out of the year where it would really make sense to buy a pass like this, but I suspect they'd still have no problem selling lots of them all season long.

Ffej said:
Was the first part even directed at me?

Nope. You sorta snuck in there while I was taking too long to respond to TW77. Sorry for the confusion.

No a better analogy would be if a restaurant let customers skip in front of other people who put their name down for $40. There are no lines at concerts or sporting events and you are already guarenteed your seat thus making the analogy poor.

That feature already exists at many restaurants, even though it may not be made public. You'd be surprised how easy it is to skip the wait at a restaurant with a slyly-placed piece of US currency in the appropriate hand. But I digress...

As for the analogy, I think you're getting caught up in the details more than you should be. The point is that with many things in life, you get what you pay for, and if you pay more for something, you're likely to get more.

Now, you're probably saying "yeah, but not at the expense of those who paid less!" If you are saying that, you raise an interesting point, but in some cases, you'd be wrong.

Let's take a look at the first class flight example...
If an airliner has X square feet available for seating, the most "fair" solution would be to evenly spread out every seat so every passenger gets just as much space as everyone else. But that's not how things work, obviously. Instead, airlines recognized that some people would not only prefer to have more comforts during their flight, but that many people would happily pay for such a feature. So, airlines accommodated those people by providing those willing to pay extra with more room, at the expense of those paying less.

How is an amusement ride any different? Just like the airliner has a finite amount of space available, a ride has a finite amount of capacity available. Those who are willing to pay more get to ride more frequently with less wait, at the expense of those standing in line (though it should be noted that only the most poorly implemented systems actually "harm" the non-premium customers in any significant way). How is this any different?

The only difference that I can see is that you're used to first class seats, whereas paid FOL access is a new thing, and as I mentioned previously, FOL access encroaches upon what was previously enthusiast territory, and that understandably upsets some. But it's important to keep some perspective here. FOL access is no less "fair" than many other commonly-accepted services that already exist.

Not to mention, people who pay more or fly more get to skip the normal TSA line at many airports.

I like DJ's analogy but I still get tripped up by the fact that I go to an amusement park to ride as many rides as possible in a given amount of time and I ride an airplane to get from Point A to Point B.

If someone wants to pay extra to have a cushier seat and a few drinks that has no affect (at least none that I can think of) on someone who is going from Point A to Point B in coach class. Both people get to the destination in exactly the same amount of time. I admit I am not familiar with Walt's statement about being able to pay to skip security. If that is true then a case can be made that that saves time prior to the flight.

If someone wants to pay extra to go to the front of the line on a ride and ride repeatedly (which I think was the point of the original arguement) then I think the arguement can be made that that affects the person who did not pay.