Is Dreamworld's Q4U queue jumping?

[SuperYoshi]

The system is available to all guests also

It is limited....

Some of you are very anti Dreamworld currently - are you trying to tell me if Movie World introduced the system (for Batwing, Superman, Shrek 4D, Wild West, Scooby Doo, HSD, Lethal Weapon) to some of you would be the best idea WVTP could of made.

(I think everyone, that thinks Q4U is Queue Jumping, would say this, if not correct me) No, we would still think that its queue jumping. Its not just the Q4U that so "great" about Dreamworld... and were also not saying that Movie World is the heaven of all of the theme parks, it has some problems to, but its a hell lot better than Dreamworld. Just look at the 'Favorite Theme Park 2009 Poll' and theres some reasons.or look at this thread about why were being so anti-dreamworld But other than that welcome to the site. Edited January 21, 2009 by Movie_World

[joz]

Here's what really ticks me off about Q4U: When they were selling out like hotcakes, instead of capping the numbers to preserve the experience of other guests and making the same money on a better margin by raising the price, they just started selling more. What is the point of it being an upcharge if nearly everyone in the park has them? As far as I'm concerned, they should be $50 with a $10 charge for every extra person and strictly limited in number. If they sell out, raise the price again. Basicly it comes down to this: Its a premium service, and it should be treated as such to preserve the experience of those who don't buy them, or it should be free for everyone (Disney style). Charging entry, then charging extra to be able to have fair access to the rides is a bad for customer service. Also, it is line jumping no matter how you look at it, and MW should not get it. Even durning Xmas at MW queues don't get much beyond 40mins, and for the rest of the year rarely extend beyond 10mins, so its a redundent service at MW.

[Spotty]

Well, the "They didn't know about it" Excuse couldn't work as there is PLENTY of signage about the devices. Even an audio speil at the front gate mentioning it. I have never even heard a person in the normal queue line complaining about it either. They also only allow a certain amount of people to have a ride reserved at any one time so that the normal wait time isn't delayed by much.

[SuperYoshi]

Well, the "They didn't know about it" Excuse couldn't work as there is PLENTY of signage about the devices. Even an audio speil at the front gate mentioning it. I have never even heard a person in the normal queue line complaining about it either.

I have " Are they cutting... Im going to report this... $@*#^ cut in front of us." and theres a Q4U sign in front of them

They also only allow a certain amount of people to have a ride reserved at any one time so that the normal wait time isn't delayed by much.

Yes but it is still delayed, isnt it? Anyway thats what all the bad stuff about Q4U is, Well in mosts peoples opinion! Edited January 21, 2009 by Movie_World

[Spotty]

By what... 5 minutes at the max unless the ride breaks down. I am in the park almost every day and I have never heard anyone complaining about it. Apart from someone harrassing a guy in a food and bev outlet about "This peice of crap isn't working, it wont let me cancel the ride!" And there was ALOT of swearing involved and the poor guy had no idea what to do! But yeah, Apart from that very pissed off guest, I have not really heard anything bad about it.

[SuperYoshi]

By what... 5 minutes at the max unless the ride breaks down

Hmm, your right about how its not delayed much. But im trying to point out that it is still queue jumping; you have acknowledged this point already though. Like Richard wrote:

apparently giving the park $20 makes it not

[Spotty]

We get the point that it is Queue Jumping mate, and if you don't like the fact of having to wait an extra 5 minutes because you didn't feel like coughing up a few extra dollars for a perk. That is your choice.

[Gazza]

Yes but it is still delayed, isnt it?

No. Lets say that there are 400 people in a queue for a ride, and the park doesn't have Q4U. Lets just say the ride takes 800pph, so therefore the queue is 30 minutes. However, lets just say that 50 people have Q4U units. They are no longer in the queue, so there are only 350 people in line. Therefore the queue time is now only 26 minutes 15 seconds. Those 50 Q4U people would take 3min 45 seconds to clear if they decided to do them all at once. So add them back together, and people are still waiting the same amount of time as before.

[SuperYoshi]

No.Lets say that there are 400 people in a queue for a ride, and the park doesn't have Q4U. Lets just say the ride takes 800pph, so therefore the queue is 30 minutes. However, lets just say that 50 people have Q4U units. They are no longer in the queue, so there are only 350 people in line. Therefore the queue time is now only 26 minutes 15 seconds. Those 50 Q4U people would take 3min 45 seconds to clear if they decided to do them all at once. So add them back together, and people are still waiting the same amount of time as before.

Oh... great explanation!

[MichaelD]

However, lets just say that 50 people have Q4U units. They are no longer in the queue, so there are only 350 people in line. Therefore the queue time is now only 26 minutes 15 seconds. Those 50 Q4U people would take 3min 45 seconds to clear if they decided to do them all at once. So add them back together, and people are still waiting the same amount of time as before.

Erm, not so. Those 50 people are more than likely in line for another ride, adding to the other ride's wait time. Q4U allows you to effectively queue in 2 lines at one; one real line and one virtual line. Speaking from personal experience, we used Q4U a couple of days ago. This allowed us to get through all the rides at Dreamworld that we wanted to do in 1/2 the time it would normally take us, as we virtually queued in the longer lines and physically queued in the shorter lines at the same time. A guest without Q4U undoubtedly would take longer to complete the park - eg they're waiting in line exclusively for Tower of Terror for 1 hour when we walk right on after having done several other rides during the waiting time. I personally will never go to Dreamworld again without a Q4U. (Oh, and according to the Q4U person, DW now have 147 units and she said the park could take a maximum of 200).

[Gazza]

^The point I was making was that the Q4U people wont delay the line you are in (Unless they decided they want to double up, and physically queue for the same ride they are in the virtual queue for) I guess the real issue is increased demand for rides at the park in general, and the behaviour of Q4U users. So long as the Q4U people always virtually queue on the attractions where the device is enabled, then there shouldn't be any real issues because all that is happening is you are shifting them out and putting them back in again at the end. They are free to go ride other things, but the other stuff at the park isn't popular anyway, so the only thing that will change is that say Gravitron will have all spaces taken instead of half of them, and the Vintage cars will have a 4 minute queue instead of a 2 minute queue. PS, I moved some posts here because they fit the topic. As for the question originally posed. Yeah, you can sort of see how it is queue jumping, but at the same time, if you changed a few words around then Fastpass could be made to be queue jumping too. I still think it is stupid for the reason that a small park in global terms should even have these sort of queue problems. As Joz said, there is no need for it to go to the WVTP parks because it is a redundant feature, why have it at MW when SDSC is the only thing it would be useful on?

Edited January 24, 2009 by Gazza

[glennborthwick]

For some it is, but I would say only a small proportion would choose to go line up on other rides. As a parent when I use a qbot I want to sit in the shade, see the shops, get a drink, get some food. Its a fantastic product. It was so good that I decided to buy shares in the company who made it.

[iwerks]

I don't have a problem with Q-bots and Q4U type stuff as long as it doesn't become a two class system with 'gold class' being twice the price of normal. Is it queue jumping - yes. Is it legal - yes. I'd like to see how Dreamworld handles the different entry points. (I just have a problem with posting comments - ignore the above.)

[notawhinger]

I know this is an old thread..but just had to comment. C'mon people ..you can't be serious. The world is full of have's and have nots. But I hardly think $50 will break the bank to get a Q4U. And for the people who miss out on getting one....then you should use your head and hop online and book earlier. I did not even know about the Q4U until I read the dreamworld site. So for people who lack the forsight to go on a website and take a look at all the pages and get informed about all the features of the park...then that is thier problem. You still have to wait 45 mins like everyone else, just not in the queue. If I was single I would not worry about it...but when you have 2 kids...it can be a godesend. Personally, I feel they should only give these to a family with kids under 18. Parents will know that a 9 year old standing in line for 45 mins is not a good thing for parents to experience. Especially 5 times during a day. Also, what about the interstate people who pay thousands of dollars to come and stay for a while in the gold coast. They only have a certain amount of time to see the gold coast and going to dream world for 2 or 3 days during thier stay just is not practical. Users are still waiting the same amount of time as everybody else...they just don't wait in line...and if dreamworld want to do that for the people who have the brains to jump on the dreamworld website and pre purchase one then good on em. Lotl above said "Normal riders are not disadvantaged in an overly large way, as the Q4U riders are mixed in with normal riders to fill up each cycle." Well when I rang dreamworld they said that Q4U users always have to go to the back few seats...so no front or middle seats..sounds fair to me. bushbeast forever said above.."The more Q4U are sold the more extra capacity is eaten up and the less rides other guests will be able to experience." ahhh, incorrect. There is no EXTRA capacity eaten up because they are in the queue. They still have to wait the 45 mins like everyone else... What's the difference between, waiting in the que or waiting on a seat on the side with a number ready to be called up? there is no EXTRA capacity used up. Sure, it may be an excuse for dreamworld to drag every last cent out of the guest, but its just like any decision, It benefits the people who use it and the people who dont use it (for whatever reason) are going to whinge and complain. What about when I line up for concert tickets overnight in my sleeping bag...only to be told that the VISA card holders bought up all the good tickets a day before??? That is life people. If people don't like the Q4U...then Don't go to dreamworld..simple.

Edited February 23, 2012 by notawhinger

[notawhinger]

Just remember you are reserving your place IN the queue and waiting IN TURN...not walking up to the back of the queue and immediatly jumping everyone else by walking to the front.

Edited February 23, 2012 by notawhinger

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Extra capacity IS taken up - because in the time your 'virtual queue' position moves forward, you are also riding another ride. Imagine, hypothetically for a minute - that the park has 10,000 people in it. Now imagine that every second person has a Q4U device, and uses it frequently. In effect, you have 15,000 people in the park. Now I realise that you can't be on more than one ride at a time - but for the other 5000 people who don't have a Q4u, they queue for 45 minutes - whilst they're waiting, the OTHER 5000 are off riding other rides. By the time the first 5000 people reach the front of the queue, the second lot have gone to the head of the line for their own ride. Most people will still argue that there isn't any extra capacity being taken - so I put it to you this way. A Q4U allows the holder to potentially ride 2 (or more) attractions in the space of one queue time. If nothing else, this is one more cycle on the ride counter, and more wear and tear for the park. The rides will be used more (because people aren't stuck in a queue - they're off riding something else) and therefore increase maintenance costs also. So if the average person rides one ride an hour, for the entire day (7 rides) and the Q4U rider rides TWO rides an hour, (14 rides) tell me how there is no extra capacity used up? Also - if Dreamworld require that Q4u holders ride towards the back of the carriage - that makes me more inclined to not get one, and not visit the park. If I pay a premium price, why am I not permitted to choose where I get to sit?

[notawhinger]

Hi Alex, Thanks for the reply. Let me put it another way as well.. If we were talking the high numbers and stats you are talking about then yes... I can see how the extra capacity comes into play. However, You are speaking with random hypothetical figures and assuming 30% of people have Q4U devices. However, Only (150 passes @ an average of 4 people per pass) 10% of people will have the passes based on 4000 people in the park. (That's if they all sell out of the passes) . That is why they limit the passes to only 150. So over 10 rides if you were in the virtual que waiting your 30 mins, you would see an extra 60 people per ride at ANY given time. Now having said that... if 150 people have a Q4U, no way will ALL of them be on rides continuosly all the time... so that brings it down to maybe an extra 30 people in line at any one time. If a ride takes 30 people and the ride takes 1 and half minutes to complete...that means at any one time on any ride, the people who do not have a Q4U will only wait an extra 1 and half minutes in line and they get to pick the front or middle seats. So your argument is kind of skewed with the very high figures you state. If they gave them to 30 or 50% of people...then yes...I can see your point..but that just isn't the case. My dad's has a doctorate in mathmatics...sorry It filtered down to me and I love getting into stats..lol So as far as I am concerned, if you have 2 little kids and can understand waiting 30 mins in line with a 9 and 10 year old multiple times a day is very tiring...and you are happy to sit in the back of the ride with your kids...then I am all for it.

Edited March 14, 2012 by notawhinger

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

So you do agree that in my example - the general public are being affected by the "additional" virtual queue persons. How is it any different if there are less - there IS still an effect on the queue, no matter how slight.

[notawhinger]

If you were talking about your hypothetical high % figures then yes people are highly inconvenienced. However, with 150 Q4U devices the inconvenience at any given point when a person lines up, of 1.5 minutes(if the wait is 30 mins or so) is very minimal. You also get to sit at the front, unlike the family with young kids who have to sit at the back, but that is the decision they make when paying for it.. I still maintain, that this is just life and if you do not like it then go elsewhere. It is their park and they get to run it how they see fit. I watch every morning when I drop my son off to school the idiot parents who park in No Standing zones. They are there for the safety of the kids and everyone. Unfortunately they continually get away with it. That's life and I can only hope that they get a fine one day. But, I am not gonna continually whinge about it or go up to every car that does it because it just peeves people off and can cause an argument. My point? Life is full of inconveniences big and small... deal with it and move on.

Edited March 15, 2012 by notawhinger

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

This is a discussion forum. Everyone is entitled to share their opinion. The extra 1.5 minutes is still hypothetical, but regardless - an extra 1.5 minutes per ride is still an extra time that otherwise wouldn't have occurred had the Q4u not been deployed. I realise it's their park, and they are free to do whatever cheap moneymaking scheme they see fit. By all means they can have rides with poor capacity, do nothing to fix it, reduce the staffing levels on the ride to further save money, and then charge a premium to people to make up for it. My whole point is theoretical. i don't care one way or the other, and i fully intend on getting one on my next visit to give it a try. My point is simply when someone spouts that there isn't an inconvenience to other guests... some of whom paid hundreds of dollars to bring their family to the park... when someone spouts that a Q4U rider still waits the same amount of time, when clearly - they wait the same amount of time, but effectively ride TWO rides in that time (thereby waiting only HALF the time for each ride), and when someone spouts that no extra capacity is being taken up, when - REGARDLESS of the math, you cannot deny that EXTRA CAPACITY IS BEING TAKEN UP - I feel a need to point out that they are incorrect. Regardless of what argument you try to put up - you made those statements - that each Q4u person waits the same time as everyone else, that there is NO extra capacity, and non-Q4u guests aren't inconvenienced - and you have already conceded that those statements are wrong. My examples used theoretical figures that would never happen - but the statistics were exaggerated to produce an easily visible result. The fact is that, even 1 Q4u device in the park still impacts on other guests. 150 of them even moreso. There is no denying it - so stop trying.

My dad's has a doctorate in mathmatics...sorry It filtered down to me and I love getting into stats..lol

My dad's a banker... so what? I'm an auditor in the tax office. Does it matter?

However, Only (150 passes @ an average of 4 people per pass) 10% of people will have the passes based on 4000 people in the park. (That's if they all sell out of the passes) .

I don't think the maths rubbed off that well. An average of 4 people per pass, and 150 passes, means (4x150) 600 people with passes. 10% of 4000 people in the park is only 400 - so you're up to 15%, not 10%.

So over 10 rides if you were in the virtual que waiting your 30 mins, you would see an extra 60 people per ride at ANY given time.

Why isn't there 600 Q4u people queueing - which could certainly be the case on a newly released ride like shockwave, or buzzsaw?

Now having said that... if 150 people have a Q4U, no way will ALL of them be on rides continuosly all the time... so that brings it down to maybe an extra 30 people in line at any one time.

You're randomly pulling 60 and 30 people on a ride. I don't see the justification that HALF (based on your 60/30 figures) of those who paid a premium wouldn't be taking full advantage of it?

If a ride takes 30 people and the ride takes 1 and half minutes to complete...that means at any one time on any ride, the people who do not have a Q4U will only wait an extra 1 and half minutes in line and they get to pick the front or middle seats.

Ladies and gentlemen - Notawhinger has posed a very good example here. I put it to the rest of the forum - name me one ride at dreamworld that fits this criteria: 1) Capacity of 30 people per cycle. 2) Available on Q4u 3) Cycle time (lets be realistic and include the time taken to load and unload, because 'ride time' isn't a realistic consideration) is 90 seconds or less. So I don't accept your 90 second proposal. Let's be realistic here - cycle times (especially at dreamworld) are closer to 3:30-4:00. If ToT2 launched every 90 seconds, Dreamworld wouldn't have a capacity issue. So a FOUR MINUTE extra delay (and this is still working with a ride that takes 30 people at one time) in a 30 minute queue - suddenly my queue time increased by more than 13%. Over the course of a 7 hour operating day (let's allow an hour for lunch and make it 6), thats 48 extra minutes spent in queues because of Q4u.. Almost an extra 2 rides. I just don't see that your argument holds water.