Latest on Disney Genie rollout and Individual Attraction purchases lineup at Walt Disney World

Sep 28, 2021 in "Disney Genie"

Posted: Tuesday September 28, 2021 6:42am ET by WDWMAGIC Staff

Disney Genie appears to be remaining on track to go live at Walt Disney World during October 2021 - shortly after the start of the resort's 50th-anniversary celebrations.

Lightning Lane sign at "it's a small world"

Disney is yet to make an official announcement on a live date, but since our last update, sources tell us that the rollout of Disney Genie has been pushed back a couple of weeks, shifting from the first week to the third week of October 2021. Timings may shift further, and until officially announced by Disney, should be treated as speculation. For the west coast, the debut at Disneyland is expected a few weeks later.

Lightning Lane sign at Under the Sea - Journey of the Little Mermaid

In addition to the shift in start date, the lineup of Individual Attraction purchases for Lightning Lane access is now expected to be:

Disney's Hollywood Studios - Star Wars: Rise of the Resistance, Slinky Dog Dash
Magic Kingdom - Space Mountain, Seven Dwarfs Mine Train
EPCOT - Frozen Ever After, Remy's Ratatouille Adventure
Disney's Animal Kingdom - Expedition Everest and Avatar Flight of Passage

Lightning Lane signage at Star Wars Rise of the Resistance

As a reminder, the attractions above are likely not included as part of the $15 per day Disney Genie+, and will require an individual attraction purchase to access the Lightning Lane. Pricing for this option will vary by date, attraction, and park and is still to be announced. We have heard reliable speculation that puts pricing between $4 and $24 depending on date, attraction, and demand.

You can learn more in our Disney Genie FAQ.

Discuss on the Forums

Get Walt Disney World News Delivered to Your Inbox

DranthJan 19, 2025

He was asked about the past and not specifically FP or FP+ but in context, FP+ is my understanding and would match the reports of cast members on the ratios they would use to let guests through each line.

LaketravisJan 19, 2025

Was the bolded referring to FP, FP+, or both? My point was that FP+ was prototyped and engineered to become a pay-for feature from the outset. They knew exactly what they were doing at each phase - increased availability and heightened awareness of the FP+ offering came at the expense of substantially increased SB wait times. Of course it was not sustainable but again, it was intentional. As well as eventually establishing consistent yet reasonable SB wait times regardlesss of current park load (yield management) while maintaining the perceived need to purchase an alternative. So here we are today, over ten years later where the majority of park attractions have consistent wait times no matter how lightly or heavily loaded the parks are yet the perception of needing to pay more for "quicker" access is maintained. Yup, it's been years since 4 hour wait times at WDW were featured on the national evening news. Quite the delicate balance, mission accomplished. Oh, but wait - where is that price point that causes pain and decline in revenue? Have they found it? Are they paying attention to the sacrificial revenue lambs that are suffering at the expense of LL sales? We shall see.

DranthJan 19, 2025

Operationally, it was a problem by the end. The vast majority of line capacity was coming through the FP lane. We had some information posted by Len just a few weeks back spelling this out: Current LL: When asked about FP era: 75-80% is ridiculous and not sustainable. I don't like an offering going from free to paid any more than anyone else but logically, it makes sense if you are a business and you need to reduce utilization. It reduces use through customer self-selection even before the tighter controls you can place on the product as well as makes stockholders happy with a new revenue stream. Paid line skips, revamping DAS access (not commenting on if this was right or wrong, just that it was done), and attendance levels more in a manageable range given park capacity have all combined to make a trip completely doable without needing a line skip on most days for most people.

LaketravisJan 19, 2025

FP+ wasn't a problem, it actually served as the model for a revenue based system. I was given a Magic Band and a prototype app in 2012-2013 and told I could pick three rides a day in addition to pulling paper FP's over the course of several visits that year. At the last "meeting" of our focus group we were asked to rank FP+ over/under FP against various metrics and also to put a dollar amount (bracketed choices) on the value we thought FP+ brought. I of course put $0 but obviously my opinion didn't mean crap 😂.

DranthJan 19, 2025

Sure, technically they could have done anything but getting FP+ usage to drop to the current levels of LL would have required a massive reduction making it essentially useless without massive changes to how it worked (number of selections, re-rides, additional selections post using three, etc.). I would say it was both. FP+ was a problem that had to be fixed. It needed to change so that it wasn't eating so much capacity. Charging for a skip the line service is one way to accomplish that goal. That it also created a new revenue stream just made it the obvious best choice from a business point of view.

PurduevianJan 17, 2025

I mean obviously Standby and Rope drop are options. However, the quantity/frequency that I am able to get on attractions will get worse if they move to a LLPP/Standby only system.

Disstevefan1Jan 17, 2025

I have also see posts here saying families were able to get on attractions without having to purchase LLMP so there are ways.

PurduevianJan 17, 2025

I sure hope not... I don't have the money for LLPP and I can typically do everything I want to do in a day with LLMP. And before someone comes in to tell me that the standby lines would be so short if they got rid of all the skip the lines I would still be able to do everything I wanted with a minimal wait... My "worst" trip to Disney was in October 2021 right before G+ launched and there was no skip the line (still had a great time, just not as good of a time). If the options were LLPP or standby online, I would visit a lot less.

Disgruntled WaltJan 17, 2025

For sure. They've basically looked at all aspects of their parks and resorts and said, "Why aren't we profiting from _____?" Then they made it so they are.

nickysJan 17, 2025

Hang on, is this why you think they introduced G+ rather than free FP+? That there were too many people using it that they decided it didn’t work. I think they simply decided this was a way to get some new revenue. Paid versions were already in place at DLP and at least one of Tokyo and Shanghai (possibly both) before WDW. When it was first rumoured the discussion included variations of all existing options. So they saw good sales in the other parks and wanted the revenue.

Jrb1979Jan 17, 2025

I personally think they need to get rid of LLMP and just have the Premier Pass. Keep that limited.

PurduevianJan 17, 2025

How would reducing the number of passes help the people buying LLMP? Wouldn't that just make rides sell out faster, causing people to get less lightning lanes per day, thus devaluing the upcharge? Disney for sure wants people to feel like LLMP is worth it so they buy it next time/tell their friends they should buy it.