Jump to content

Dreamworld to get virtual queuing in two weeks time


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Glenn, is it ok if I ask if you are a rep from Lo-Q?
No I'm not but I follow them closely so I am of course biased!!. Im UK based and buy stocks and shares in ridiculously risky small cap shares. About three or four years ago I picked up 200 000 Lo-q shares when they were 5 pence (say about ten au cents). They have risen sharply in that time, so are about 8 times the value of when I bought them but I still feel they are well undervalued. They have announced they will make at least 1.85 million pounds this year and the whole company is only valued at 5 million due to the terrible market conditions. They have no debt and will benefit from the weak pound/strong US dollar. They already have 3 new parks lined up for next year - magic mountain, discovery kingdom and dreamworld, plus there are hopefully more in the pipeline worldwide.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a cool idea! :D Is the fast pass at Disney the one you can use on space mountain where you go in a different entrance and push in? I want that :D But still, this doesn't seem so bad. Year passes are $115, 2 entry tickets, so it's good for us locals :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
If anyone local , or someone who works at dreamworlds hears detils about pricing, number of qbots available i would be very interested.
Very few people know at the moment, give it another week. And Im sure more info will be available. From what I understand, there will be a deposit required for use of the device, which is refunded at the end of the day when you return it, then users will pay per ride, with discounts for families/groups etc. Could be interesting. Edited by Lotl_90
Link to post
Share on other sites
Very few people know at the moment, give it another week. And Im sure more info will be available. From what I understand, there will be a deposit required for use of the device, which is refunded at the end of the day when you return it, then users will pay per ride, with discounts for families/groups etc. Could be interesting.
thanks . if they do it per ride thats a new development. Normally its say 20 dollars for one plus 5 per extra person added on, for the whole day
thanks . if they do it per ride thats a new development. Normally its say 20 dollars for one plus 5 per extra person added on, for the whole day
if you hear anymore or see them installing it and can have a chat with them onsite, can you keep me informed. cheers
Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the fast pass at Disney the one you can use on space mountain where you go in a different entrance and push in? I want that
Push in? The Disney fast pass has an entrance NEXT to the normal entrance and the queue simply joins in to the normal queue further on (usually half apart, excluding Indiana Jones). You don't skip the entire line, you basically join half way in (depending on the ride) which is what makes Disney FastPass so fair. What else makes its fair is it also FREE, meaning everyone can enjoy it, each admission ticket can only obtain one pass at a time and each attraction has a limit of passes per attraction. This is NOTHING like Disney FastPass. Edited by mickey_079
Link to post
Share on other sites

The disney though is troublesome. It doesnt allow for breakdowns, and causes awful bottlenecks and add to line times. This system is dynamic and can reschedule immediately there are any delays. You can also book any ride from anywhere in the park. They keep emphasising fair to all. In the states they seem to be more ablke to accept that people with money can buy there way tot he front of the queue, but Iguess UK and AUs attitudes are different. Lo-q are working towards a day when the park is queue free. I.e everybody gets a qbot and plans there day on it, however most parks infrastructure cant handle busy days with nobody in a line.

Push in? The Disney fast pass has an entrance NEXT to the normal entrance and the queue simply joins in to the normal queue further on (usually half apart, excluding Indiana Jones). You don't skip the entire line, you basically join half way in (depending on the ride) which is what makes Disney FastPass so fair. What else makes its fair is it also FREE, meaning everyone can enjoy it, each admission ticket can only obtain one pass at a time and each attraction has a limit of passes per attraction. This is NOTHING like Disney FastPass.
Link to post
Share on other sites
In the states they seem to be more ablke to accept that people with money can buy there way tot he front of the queue, but Iguess UK and AUs attitudes are different.
Damn straight they're different. This is one of the huge problems I have with this idea. I honestly can't imagine many people are going to be very happy about it, that is if they take the time to think about the system properly.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mate, if I was you I'd stop arguing. This isn't the U.K. and because most people here haven't been to Legoland or even the U.K. we aren't judging it based on that. Just like you haven't been to Aus, you can't really say that attitudes to line jumping are the same as the U.K. - the fact is, we know Dreamworld, and we know it's guests. The moment you stop defending Lo-Q from a bias perspective you may see what most here are trying to say: the system is unfair. When things aren't fair in Australia, people get pissed off. Bottom line. And they are well within their rights to do so. So how about you take a step back and look at it the way everyone else is here instead of being so biased towards this system.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mate, if I was you I'd stop arguing.
Ease up Myk, it is a forum and if people are able to say why this is a bad idea then he should be able to say the positives, at least he has said who he is... The thing that is troublesome with this being at Dreamworld is that it gets a fraction of the daily attendance that the other parks where Low-Q has been implemented, and on many days of the year I don't think anybody will get it because bypassing a 10 minute line is pointless and you can't go off and do anything worthwhile in that period. For the busier days lines are needlessly long because quite often they aren't running rides at full capacity, don't have adequate staff on (And in the case of rides like Cyclone, it only has one train available regardless) To me, its not really needed at Dreamworld. I can see the benefits of it as a convenience item (Though of course, the only person to benefit is the user), but the 'pay per ride' model Lotl_90 mentioned doesn't follow this at all.
Lo-q are working towards a day when the park is queue free. I.e everybody gets a qbot and plans there day on it, however most parks infrastructure cant handle busy days with nobody in a line.
I have wondered when a park would be like this. It would be interesting if some of the new Dubai parks were built around this model. My only concern is whether you could potentially be denied time slots, because using the lo-q device makes it easier to join queues, and hence demand for rides would be higher. Edited by Gazza
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lo-q is bad for guest experience, however, it is a new way to make extra money. Thats it, don't try to sell it as a way to improve the park because it isn't. Lo-q is bad for guest experience, however, it is a new way to make extra money. Thats it, don't try to sell it as a way to improve the park because it isn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, some people are defensive here. Though this was a discussion forum and id share what i know about lo-q. Clearly im coming from a personal angle- ive already stated Im a shareholder with a vested interest. I compare dreamworld with legoland similar peak times, a very tight school holiday period where queus are long. L0-q products work well at any park above 500 000. I believe DW gets about 750k so its spot on. 80% of the annnual usage of qbots is concentrated in 50 rental days when frankly most parks cant handle the huge spike to attendance. Obviously holidays and peak weekends. A qbot does markedly improve park experience at these times. Who on earth chooses to stand in a queue when for small fee they dont have to. Especially for families. I have two small kids. Do I want to stand in a queue for an hour for a 2 minute ride. No way. I will still be waiting the same time as anyone else but can do other things, visit the shops, buy lunch, and enjoy the park. Heres a similar post From Edward Jones Posted September 20, 2006 at 10:26 AM I went to the opening of the Bluegrass with my mother aged 82. We heard about the Q2Q device on our Dollywood newsletter so decided to get it. We had to queue for 35 mins to get it but it was well worth it. A really nice english man showed us how it worked and we pre-booked Ricky Skaggs. It was superb !. The queue for Ricky was over 1.5 hours long but we did not have to stand in it, that was great considering the age of my mom. When it was time for the show the Q2Q beeped alot and let us know it was time for the show. We then were let into the exit for the show and had priority seating before anyone else. This was so great and really made our day, well worth the $16 charge. We went back on the saturday to get another but Q2Q had already sold out completely by 10:15am so we had to get in line for that day. So $16 not to stand in a line for hours and get great seating is well worth it. Dollywood should have done this a long time ago. For people like me with elderly parents who can't stand for long it was a god send. Mr E. Jones. Implementation always follow the same path. For example this is a link to the dollywood discussion 2 years ago - http://www.themeparkinsider.com/news/response.cfm?ID=3084 Exactly the same comments and process as this thread - People um and arr about the idea. Some negativity. Enthusiasts say, its not fair , its not needed. Over the seasons more and more people use it, enjoy it, and come back for more. People gradually realise it's the way to go. Two years down the line now and its viewed a normal part of operations. They can only book one ride at a time, they wait the same amount of time. If people choose to spend $10 dollars to improve the experience thats personal choice. Nov 9 2008, 07:41 PM Post #18 random post froma dollywood thread last week Group: Members Posts: 13,547 Joined: 26-November 04 From: ~ Member No.: 1,227 Dollywood's version of Q-Bot is very, very economical, and works for both shows and rides...I highly recommend it....

Edited by glennborthwick
Link to post
Share on other sites

Glenn you have a completely unobjective view here. At least company marketing folk are expected to have such views. It's great for your experience ifyou can afford it but ifyou can't it ruins your day. Families save their pennies so they can come to a park and forget reality for a day. The last thing they need is to be reminded in park that they are poor. Or have to explain to their kids why they have to wait whilst others walk by. Being able to reserve a place without even having to go to the ride is just wrong, and again creates more problems for those not using it. I for one don't see having to plan my fun as a positive. And to imply Disney doesn't know what they are doing when it comes to crowd management is just comical.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn you have a completely unobjective view here. At least company marketing folk are expected to have such views. It's great for your experience ifyou can afford it but ifyou can't it ruins your day. Families save their pennies so they can come to a park and forget reality for a day. The last thing they need is to be reminded in park that they are poor. Or have to explain to their kids why they have to wait whilst others walk by. Being able to reserve a place without even having to go to the ride is just wrong, and again creates more problems for those not using it. I for one don't see having to plan my fun as a positive. And to imply Disney doesn't know what they are doing when it comes to crowd management is just comical.
My view is objective from a family perspective. I have a miserrable time at a park due to the queues. I went to alton towers and waited nearly 2 hours with my 8 yr old. I can only go in school holidays at peak times. People choose how they spend their money. Would I buy an overpriced tshirt, no. Would i pay so I can wait drinking a coffee, or having a picnic - yes. Reminding people are poor is absolute emotional nonsense. Pricing will of course be key and hopefully it will be affordable. Six flags use it as a huge cash cow, which is a debate - for example $200 dollars for a gold experience, however the same solution at dollywood is $10 plus $5 per person (US dollars - not sure how that equates to AUS) Disney did actually try to copy the patent for lo-q's technology but the lawyers stopped them - one of the few times in history. They are actually doing something very similar with Verizon via mobile phones for next season so its coming throughout the industry. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-disn...1,7925212.story (link to disney story) fast pass at disney does have significant drawbacks both from an operational and user point of view. 1) Numbers are limited - they often sell out by 11 oclock on main days. 2) They are not dynamic or interactive. If a ride breaks down it can't inform you, and everything gets stacked up 3) Its heavily labour intensive to the park. 4) Ebay forgeries have caused big problems of course one great benefit is that they are free (although there is obviously a cost perspective built into the entrance price) If qbots were free and built into the entrance price I doubt there would be much debate that they are a step forward. Im very interested to see how they price it at DW. If they are doing the per ride thing that will be interesting as its the frst time. People can then choose how much they want to spend on the qbot. Edited by glennborthwick
Link to post
Share on other sites
1) Numbers are limited - they often sell out by 11 oclock on main days.
Isn't that a necessary evil though?....a ride can only carry a certain number of people per day, and it would be irresponsible for them to give out more than the ride can cope with, because if the balance is too far in the favour of fast passers then standby waits become unbearable. The Six Flags approach is what I would be worried about at DW, since it basically lets you pay to line jump (rather than pay to queue elsewhere) and it sort of puts a sour taste in the mouth of guests if a minority are basically pushing in all day. At Six Flags Magic Mountain I bought 4 flashpasses, and ironically, the only rides I had to use them on were rides being run well below capacity (Tatsu with only 1 side of the station open, with 2 trains, and Scream!, with only 1 out of 3 trains running) so it kind of annoys me you have to pay to avoid an unnecessary wait. This is the issue at Dreamworld. At Dollywood, the park is renowned for its good operations, so I can see why they don't need to charge as much for their Q-bot. Edited by Gazza
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was working on a bit of an editorial for this that covers much the same ground as what I'm saying below but thought that I'd throw a post up here because I think there's a few points that haven't yet been raised... might still finish up the article as it's an interesting subject I think.

1) Numbers are limited - they often sell out by 11 oclock on main days. 2) They are not dynamic or interactive. If a ride breaks down it can't inform you, and everything gets stacked up 3) Its heavily labour intensive to the park. 4) Ebay forgeries have caused big problems of course one great benefit is that they are free (although there is obviously a cost perspective built into the entrance price)
1) Limiting numbers is a crucial component to either system. 2) Is that really a setback? How does a ride failing not screw over Lo-Q users too, just the same as it does normal guests. A ridiculous looking buzzing thing around your neck isn't going to make a breakdown any more enjoyable. 3) We are talking about parks here that move vastly huge amounts of people. Dreamworld cannot be directly compared to parks like Legoland because of the seaonal differences. Yes Dreamworld 1.5 million vs. Legoland 1.7 million but that's with half the length of season. For an effective comparison it's more like Dreamworld 750,000 vs. Legoland 1.7 million. 4) Yeah see now that's a sales pitch from Lo-Q. I guarantee you that with the 100 million plus that Disney parks around the world see through their gates each year, they could care less about In regards to the cost beenfit of it being free, Disney are selling an experience. They offer FastPass not so that they can secretly tack a few extra bucks onto the ticket fee, but because by offering it as a part of the standard package they are creating a tangible and very effective benefit to their product.
If qbots were free and built into the entrance price I doubt there would be much debate that they are a step forward. Im very interested to see how they price it at DW. If they are doing the per ride thing that will be interesting as its the frst time. People can then choose how much they want to spend on the qbot.
Evidently you're not overly familiar with Dreamworld, so here's a few interesting items. A good solid peak day's attendance is around 10,000 people. The park has what they call the "Big 6" thrill rides, which we can expect to have Lo-Q installed. Add also perhaps Runaway Reptar, their children's coaster. Firstly, let's assume Dreamworld's goal from this is a $2 increase in per capita spending which I would say is in line with the typical goals of Macquarie Leisure, the park's owners. On a day with 10,000 guests, that's $20,000 increase in revenue. At a modest $20 a piece that means they want to sell 1,000 a day. Now, here's probably where your comparisons to parks like Legoland fall flat. There is not a single ride at Dreamworld which operates at more than about 400 people per hour. I suspect I'm being generous with the below estimates; Dreamworld is known for its somewhat unique lack of operational efficiency: Cyclone: 200pph (one dispatch every 7 minutes) The Claw: 400pph (one cycle every 5 minutes) Mick Doohan's Motocoaster: 300pph (one dispatch every 3 minutes) Tower of Terror: 200pph (one dispatch every 4 minutes) Giant Drop: 200pph (both sides cycling every 5 minutes) Wipeout: 300pph (one cycle every 8 minutes) Reptar: 200pph (one dispatch every 5 minutes) Total hourly capacity of rides with Lo-Q: 1,800. I'll even be generous and say 2,000 as I'm sure a water ride (or two) would be thrown in. For this to be remotely good value and a positive experience for buyers, we can expect that every visitor would want to get on each Lo-Q ride once during their day. We'll say 8 rides. Over the course of a 8 hour day at the park (summer extended hours), that means they need to be doing one ride each hour. OK, we now have exactly half the hourly capacity of each major ride in the park being dedicated to Lo-Q holders. Any less and people will leave unsatisfied and the product is essentially a ripoff. So we have rides like Motocoaster absorbing around 150 people every hour because the other 150 are those who've paid a bit extra. Here's the fun part. Motocoaster can now only absorb around 13% of the total "normal" guests, compared with 24% before Lo-Q is introduced. If anyone can explain conclusively how this isn't negatively impacting "normal" park-goers -- WHO HAVE ALREADY PAID $70-odd TO ENTER THE PARK!! -- then I'll gladly shout them and their family/friends Lo-Q for the day. Anyone that honestly can't see this being an almighty disaster is kidding themselves. These things work at parks with twice the annual attendance and half the operating season because these parks have the depth in their attraction lineup to be able to absorb many times the amount of guests Dreamworld possibly can. Hell, if this were Movie World we were talking about I'd probably be singing a different tune because at least they have a good number of high capacity attractions that are consistently operated in an efficient manner throughout the peak season (oh, and because I'm biased, hate Dreamworld blah blah blah) that could absorb a decent number of Lo-Q buyers without significantly impacting normal guests. I'm all for things like FlowRider and the V8 Playstation simulator thingy because these upcharges are for those who want to spend the extra money for the added experience. I myself aren't impartial to spending a bit extra every now and again on something a bit different. But these things don't subtract from a normal day at the park. At the end of the day, within the context of a park like Dreamworld, there is simply no realistic way in which the Lo-Q system can be effectively integrated. It won't affect me given it's been about five years since I spent a day at Dreamworld and I'm in no hurry to get back. But that doesn't mean it's not an utterly ridiculous idea.
Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Limiting numbers is a crucial component to either system. Not necessarily. Lo-q's product can handle a much larger proportion of people and they are working on a product for every member in the park. It's more down to whether the walkways, shops, other areas could handle people not ina queue. Also lo-q's software is far more accurate than a cruder fastpass version. IT is being combined with accurate queue measuring froma compny called irisys. This means it can more accurately schedule times and increase load factors. 2) Is that really a setback? How does a ride failing not screw over Lo-Q users too, just the same as it does normal guests. A ridiculous looking buzzing thing around your neck isn't going to make a breakdown any more enjoyable. Sometimes rides fail for ten minutes, sometimes for an hour, sometimes fr the rest of the day. A qbot can inform you immediately where-ever you are in the park, and reschedule you accurately. Fast pass version, you might not find out and it leads to huge bottlenecks. 3) We are talking about parks here that move vastly huge amounts of people. Dreamworld cannot be directly compared to parks like Legoland because of the seaonal differences. Yes Dreamworld 1.5 million vs. Legoland 1.7 million but that's with half the length of season. For an effective comparison it's more like Dreamworld 750,000 vs. Legoland 1.7 million. Qbots basically earn 80% of their income in two months. My guess is that anywhere in the world there are peak times, presumably school holidays and weekends. Sometimes pure attendance numbers are just one of the factors. Otherss are the geography of the park, number of headline rides. In six flags some of the parks with 750k attendances have longer lines than those with 2 million due to this. 4) Yeah see now that's a sales pitch from Lo-Q. I guarantee you that with the 100 million plus that Disney parks around the world see through their gates each year, they could care less about. Not quite sure what youre getting at. To be honest disney could do what they want their pockets are so big. From lo-q's point of view its generally good. Disney dont share their technology with other parks, but the industry does want a solution to the biggest moan on all customer surveys - waiting in lines. Customers have two commodities , money and time. If dw price point it correctly for the market people who value time will take up on it, and anecdotally from Sf and dollywood parks the usersfeedback in virtually univerally positive. Im sure this is just a small part in maqueries plan to raise per capitas spending, but it is virtually pure profit. Normally there is a one off cost, probably around $70 000 aus dollars for installation. This is falling all the time as the wireless architecture is much cheaper. Looking at your figures a typical target is 10% of attendees on the busiest 60 days and 3% of attendees on the next 60 busiest days. Lets say its priced at just $10 a person similar to legoland- that is 10% x 10 000 x $10 x 60 days plus 3% x 6000 x $10 x 60 days = a total revenue of around 700 000. Staffing/ cost of sales would equate for around 50% of this. If the profit after that is split 50/50 the park would make an extra 175 000 dollars, without capital expense, not including any extra the patrons would spend because they werent in a queue. Wow they do need to improve dispatch times, however you would go on the same amount of rides regardless. Thats a separate issue. Qbots dont make you go on any more rides save possibly making it slightly more efficient. There should be no difference to going with or without a qbot in terms of expectations. If i went and was prepared to wait in queues to go on every ride I still wouldnt hit your target of 8 rides regardless. Bad operations is bad operations. You are not buying more rides, just not having to stand in the queue for them. Perhaps lo-q can help thm with managing the queues more effectivel as well as they are working on th with SF. If the rumours are true and its a per ride cost that is interesting and could be explained by your analysis of load times. Lets say they say a one off $10 plus $2 a ride you could choose how much you want to spend. Im very interested in whether this is the model. Its also doesnt negatively affect other wait times as you can only book one ride at a time. You wouldnt need to allocate any more capacity than normal and certainly nowhere near 50%. The standard line will look proportionally shorter with qbot holders merging (normally from a separate entrance). thanks for the intelligent debtae glenn Firstly, let's assume Dreamworld's goal from this is a $2 increase in per capita spending which I would say is in line with the typical goals of Macquarie Leisure, the park's owners. On a day with 10,000 guests, that's $20,000 increase in revenue. At a modest $20 a piece that means they want to sell 1,000 a day. Now, here's probably where your comparisons to parks like Legoland fall flat. There is not a single ride at Dreamworld which operates at more than about 400 people per hour. I suspect I'm being generous with the below estimates; Dreamworld is known for its somewhat unique lack of operational efficiency: Cyclone: 200pph (one dispatch every 7 minutes) The Claw: 400pph (one cycle every 5 minutes) Mick Doohan's Motocoaster: 300pph (one dispatch every 3 minutes) Tower of Terror: 200pph (one dispatch every 4 minutes) Giant Drop: 200pph (both sides cycling every 5 minutes) Wipeout: 300pph (one cycle every 8 minutes) Reptar: 200pph (one dispatch every 5 minutes) Total hourly capacity of rides with Lo-Q: 1,800. I'll even be generous and say 2,000 as I'm sure a water ride (or two) would be thrown in. For this to be remotely good value and a positive experience for buyers, we can expect that every visitor would want to get on each Lo-Q ride once during their day. We'll say 8 rides. Over the course of a 8 hour day at the park (summer extended hours), that means they need to be doing one ride each hour. OK, we now have exactly half the hourly capacity of each major ride in the park being dedicated to Lo-Q holders. Any less and people will leave unsatisfied and the product is essentially a ripoff. So we have rides like Motocoaster absorbing around 150 people every hour because the other 150 are those who've paid a bit extra. Here's the fun part. Motocoaster can now only absorb around 13% of the total "normal" guests, compared with 24% before Lo-Q is introduced. If anyone can explain conclusively how this isn't negatively impacting "normal" park-goers -- WHO HAVE ALREADY PAID $70-odd TO ENTER THE PARK!! -- then I'll gladly shout them and their family/friends Lo-Q for the day. Anyone that honestly can't see this being an almight disaster is kidding themselves. These things work at parks with twice the annual attendance and half the operating season because these parks have the depth in their attraction lineup to be able to absorb many times the amount of guests Dreamworld possibly can. Hell, if this were Movie World we were talking about I'd probably be singing a different tune because at least they have a good number of high capacity attractions that are consistently operated in an efficient manner throughout the peak season (oh, and because I'm biased, hate Dreamworld blah blah blah) that could absorb a decent number of Lo-Q buyers without significantly impacting normal guests. I'm all for things like FlowRider and the V8 Playstation simulator thingy because these upcharges are for those who want to spend the extra money for the added experience. I myself aren't impartial to spending a bit extra every now and again on something a bit different. But these things don't subtract from a normal day at the park. At the end of the day, within the context of a park like Dreamworld, there is simply no realistic way in which the Lo-Q system can be effectively integrated. It won't affect me given it's been about five years since I spent a day at Dreamworld and I'm in no hurry to get back. But that doesn't mean it's not an utterly ridiculous idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not necessarily. Lo-q's product can handle a much larger proportion of people and they are working on a product for every member in the park.
But there always needs to be a physical cap on sales or no system works. They're selling a premium service and if too many people subscribe to it then it loses its purpose because the rides in question can't handle the numbers.
Not quite sure what youre getting at. To be honest disney could do what they want their pockets are so big. From lo-q's point of view its generally good. Disney dont share their technology with other parks, but the industry does want a solution to the biggest moan on all customer surveys - waiting in lines.
Sorry I didn't finish my thought here. When you're entertaining 100 million plus guests a year, a few rogue FastPasses being sold on eBay are not an issue because enforcing it would be both too costly and ultimately a negative experience for the guest, for a minuscule fraction of guests would be abusing the system. If Disney had a system like Lo-Q's then you can bet that through the sheer numbers passing through the gates that there'd be people working very hard at hacking the system too.
Customers have two commodities , money and time. If dw price point it correctly for the market people who value time will take up on it, and anecdotally from Sf and dollywood parks the usersfeedback in virtually univerally positive.
Two tangible commodities. The most important product a theme park sells and a guest buys is experience. The option of spending more to improve your experience is not a new thing and theme parks including Dreamworld have been doing it for years through various upcharge attractions. However in the very specific context of such a system at Dreamworld, there are two things that need to be done: satisfying all guests who have paid their entry fee, and also satisfying those who have paid extra. Through Dreamworld's own brand of operational inefficiency, there is simply no way that Lo-Q can satisfy both groups. If they allocate enough capacity to Lo-Q holders to absorb the number that needs to for it to be considered a good experience then it'll leave queues exceptionally long for normal park-goers. If they gear it towards normal park-goers then they won't be moving enough Lo-Q holders through and the item becomes a waste of money because they won't be able to get in the 8 rides they expected when they purchased the system.
Wow they do need to improve dispatch times, however you would go on the same amount of rides regardless. Thats a separate issue. Qbots dont make you go on any more rides save possibly making it slightly more efficient. There should be no difference to going with or without a qbot in terms of expectations. If i went and was prepared to wait in queues to go on every ride I still wouldnt hit your target of 8 rides regardless. Bad operations is bad operations.
But that is precisely it. No one here is or should be arguing this in terms of how it integrates at a hypothetical park. We're talking about how it works at Dreamworld. Dreamworld is a park that has dreadful operations. Trying to absorb 1,000 each hour who expect to be able to go on a ride because they've paid a premium when the rides in question have a combined capacity of only 2,000 will be incredibly detrimental to the other 9,000 people who also want to experience these attractions and have paid their $70-odd to do so.
Its also doesnt negatively affect other wait times as you can only book one ride at a time. You wouldnt need to allocate any more capacity than normal and certainly nowhere near 50%. The standard line will look proportionally shorter with qbot holders merging (normally from a separate entrance).
But you see for Dreamworld to be able to successfully market and sell this, then there needs to be a benefit to guests. If they're not getting on a measly 8 rides in a day with the device then it won't be seen as value. For each guest holding the device to get on these 8 rides in an 8 hour day, it is a fact that 50% of each ride's capacity needs to be allocated to FastPass.
Link to post
Share on other sites

i take on board your points although differ on opinion on some. Your figures are suggesting everybody who buys a qbot wants to go on every ride. That simply isnt the case. From experience some six flags might have 8 headline rides but the family market dont expect to go on them all in a day, probably only 3 or 4 headline rides , and legoland is no different really and it hasnt affected sales or customer feedback which has been great . Possibly lo-q will sell it with a 4 ride maximum but for less money. They talked about that model at the agm. All you are paying for is to not stand in the line. If you want the full quota of rides a gold version would be needed and from what you say it probably isnt ready for it until operations are improved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.