What is going on with the FP+ crackdown?

[DisneyMom93]

I don't think any of us are high enough on the Disney food chain to know what Disney knows or what they think.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but stating your opinion as the voice of Disney when you aren't can lead to incorrect impressions.

Actually....

 

[5DisneyNuts]

Actually....

LOL

Good to know Mr./Ms. Iger stays at POP

 

[DisneyMom93]

LOL

Good to know Mr./Ms. Iger stays at POP

LOL. I meant there are ways to find out from those that are actually higher up on the Disney food chain.

 

[mustinjourney]

You are absolutely right. From Disney's TOS, these bookings don't seem to be doing anything wrong. But they inordinately hurt people who are really camping as it is an activity that is not easily done for a short length of time (you have to drive there, then set up) and these bookings mess with the calendar. So, if as a tent camper, I can't book a length of time that is reasonable, I can't go to Fort Wilderness. It's not as simple as choosing one of the other 1,000s of hotel room because in comparison there are a tiny number of tent sites. I have 4 kids - for me to afford a room to "legally" accommodate all of us means that I can't stay onsite at all. I think it's a situation that hurts other Disney fans instead of the Disney corporation.

This is exactly why I brought it up. I kept hearing everyone say how having extra fast passes is "unfair" to other guests.
While it might not be breaking a rule, booking a throw away room is inherently unfair to other disney fans bc it ties up a room and might prevent people from even going to Disney at all.

At a minimum, it artificially raises resort prices bc demand appears to be higher than it actually is.

 

[jknezek]

The thing I don't understand is that it shows, at least somewhat, how Disney values onsite perks. If you can put 10 on a campsite for a day, you get free parking, EMH, early FPs and ADRs. So with tent sites running between $60 and $120 depending on time of year, assume you have a family of 5 on the 10 person campsite. One car parking pass is $25 per day and you get 2 days worth. So the price of all the other extras is between $10 and $70. EMH is 1-2 hours. If you pay $110 for a park ticket and the park is open to that ticket from 9a.m. to 10p.m., that's 13 hours. So on an hourly basis, you are paying $8.50 an hour per person. With a family of 5, that benefit is $42 to $84 per day, and again you get both check in and out, so that's 2 days worth. So regardless of whether you paid the cheapest possible tent rate, or some of the most expensive, those 2 perks alone, for 2 days, are worth significantly more than the cost of the site. So that means that Disney doesn't value the ability to make early FPs or early ADRs at all, as the other perks provide more benefit than a one night throw away tent site costs. And this analysis only includes 5 people, when you can have up to 10 on a Fort Wilderness site.

The total benefit could be massive. 10 people, assume 3 families, $75 per day in parking passes, $150 total. EMH of 2 hours per day, 2 days, 10 people? $340. Right there is $490 and again, there is absolutely nothing about the value of early FPs or early ADRs.

Disney has been squeezing every possible dollar out of things for decades. With their army of bean counters, how are they screwing this up so badly???

 

[Boski]

Was the deleted fast pass loophole thread undeleted and closed? It suddenly reappeared in my followed threads feed today. If so, I like the change of policies.

That is absolutely sad if they did.

 

[mustinjourney]

There are different ways of using the room that someone pays for without staying in the room for the night. You can pay for an extra night in a beach resort to take a shower in the afternoon after a beach day - then check out in the evening without staying the night you paid for. We have done that. You can pay for the extra night in the rental home before your stay so you could check in early in the morning the next day without actually using the night before. We have done that. You can pay for a rental home for 10 nights, go on a cruise for 4 nights in the middle of your stay and leave your belongings in the house for 4 nights -without using the house to actually sleep there. It saves the hassle of waiting for check in until the afternoon after the cruise or taking all belongings and being forced to leave it in the hot car while on the cruise. We have done both - and definitely prefer renting the house or hotel to cover all days, so we can take only what we need on the cruise. Someone could argue that "the house or hotel could be rented out for those nights", but we are paying for the comfort and benefit of early check in or late check out or "using" the house while not sleeping there in those situations. We have also used one night rentals in other hotels for few hours rest, people rent day rooms or one night stays at Comfort Inn on Paradise Island to access Atlantis Waterpark. Disney allows one night camp reservations and does not restrict benefits for those reservations at this time. For me it means that if I pay for the reservation, I can use it in the way that I need it. If it is clearly not allowed or restricted by Disney in any way - we probably pay for a night at value resort, and may be actually use it for a few hours, depending on our needs.

So what are your feelings about someone who gets two tickets just for themselves so that they can have 6 FP selections? Assume they swipe the tap style upon entry such that the tix are being used.

 

[5DisneyNuts]

LOL. I meant there are ways to find out from those that are actually higher up on the Disney food chain.

K

 

[AnnaKat]

One thing about the campsites. Yes they have a small # available compared to value rooms. But the booking rules are the same for throwaway campsite bookers, as well as 7-night gonna-actually-camp bookers.
The 7-nighters can book as far out as allowed, and most likely get their week IF they plan that far ahead.

It's a supply vs. demand problem.

Many DVC Owners would love to book Jambo House Club Level, or Value Studios.
The non-AKL Owners can never find availability @ 7 months out--when they are allowed to book.

AKL Owners are allowed to book @ 11 months out. YET the walkers make even 11-month out bookings for CL or value studio almost impossible!

Campsites are much easier to find availability than the above situations.

If for example,
we don't try to book @ 11-months,
we don't expect to get a value studio.

If the CL & value studio bookers are "forced" to walk ressies weeks in advance,

then why would campers expect to get what they want with such HIGH demand IF they don't book as far out as possible?!

It's a supply & demand issue.

 

[Westcoastwild]

How is it a legal loophole? Do you really think Disney wants people paying $60 for one night at their resort and staying elsewhere for $200 a night yet keeping all the benefits as if they stayed the week at DW resort?

Disney is losing that entire week's resort room reservation payment. Plus people eating offsite for dinner after the park, and breakfast elsewhere before going to the parks from their offsite hotel.

There's no way DW set it up for that. And once they figure out a way to close that loophole they will.

Sure but by the same token, if you take granola bars for breakfast and stay on property, it could be argued that Disney will refuse to allow food in the rooms because those granola bars will "steal profits".

I just don't see them closing the "loophole" based on that. The only way they would beat that loophole would be to require minimum night stays. If you don't show up by a certain time that night, you forfeit deposit for those minimum nights.

But the fort folks aren't going to like that policy and it won't help them anyway. People will still book it if they don't care about money. That site will most likely still be empty for the entire stay and Disney potentially loses profits in two ways. 1. They lose from the people who don't show up. 2. They lose from people who are angry enough over the new policy to stop coming. I hate campgrounds who do minimum night stays. Hotels- same thing. It's bad customer policy.

Personally- this would not at all make other fort people happy- but I think the bigger problem with the fort is that they don't require park tickets and they don't have MAXIMUM night stays as far as I'm aware. People apparently go for weeks on end and they don't always go to stay there for the parks. Popular hostels have maximum number of nights in a year to make it possible for a greater number of people to stay at the hostel. I'd support something like 10 night maximum for the year. It would certainly make it easier for out of towners like me to snag holiday reservations.

 

[jade1]

Wonder how the "occupancy" rate at the Campgrounds has been over the years. Regardless is someone actually was there etc.

 

[jknezek]

Wonder how the "occupancy" rate at the Campgrounds has been over the years. Regardless is someone actually was there etc.

I'm willing to bet that Fort Wilderness ** campsites ** have the highest occupancy percentage of any WDW hotel on an annual basis. ** The cabins are nowhere near as popular. **

Edited for the areas inside the stars

 

[mustinjourney]

One thing about the campsites. Yes they have a small # available compared to value rooms. But the booking rules are the same for throwaway campsite bookers, as well as 7-night gonna-actually-camp bookers.
The 7-nighters can book as far out as allowed, and most likely get their week IF they plan that far ahead.

It's a supply vs. demand problem.

Many DVC Owners would love to book Jambo House Club Level, or Value Studios.
The non-AKL Owners can never find availability @ 7 months out--when they are allowed to book.

AKL Owners are allowed to book @ 11 months out. YET the walkers make even 11-month out bookings for CL or value studio almost impossible!

Campsites are much easier to find availability than the above situations.

If for example,
we don't try to book @ 11-months,
we don't expect to get a value studio.

If the CL & value studio bookers are "forced" to walk ressies weeks in advance,

then why would campers expect to get what they want with such HIGH demand IF they don't book as far out as possible?!

It's a supply & demand issue.

Except the demand is artificially high if there are many people booking throwaway rooms.

This is an arbitrage which means it's not an efficient market.

 

[ConnecticutFlea]

Sure but by the same token, if you take granola bars for breakfast and stay on property, it could be argued that Disney will refuse to allow food in the rooms because those granola bars will "steal profits"

I agree. And following along that line of reasoning, are the people who have groceries delivered by Green Grocer cheating Disney out of food profits? And what about the ones who drag large coolers around the park all day?

So what are your feelings about someone who gets two tickets just for themselves so that they can have 6 FP selections? Assume they swipe the tap style upon entry such that the tix are being used.

If someone wants to buy themselves two tickets, they should be able to get six FPs per day. A ticket entitles the bearer to three FPs. Two tickets equals six FPs. It doesn't matter if they are used by one person or two. From a bottom line perspective, Disney would make more money selling 2 tickets to be used by one person on the same day than by selling a two day ticket to the same one person. In either scenario, that one person should get 6 FPs.

 

[mustinjourney]

I agree. And following along that line of reasoning, are the people who have groceries delivered by Green Grocer cheating Disney out of food profits? And what about the ones who drag large coolers around the park all day?



If someone wants to buy themselves two tickets, they should be able to get six FPs per day. A ticket entitles the bearer to three FPs. Two tickets equals six FPs. It doesn't matter if they are used by one person or two. From a bottom line perspective, Disney would make more money selling 2 tickets to be used by one person on the same day than by selling a two day ticket to the same one person. In either scenario, that one person should get 6 FPs.

I actually don't have a problem with people buying two tickets and getting extra FPs thru that method (actually swipe both bands) so long as they aren't both APs.

However, I do think throw away rooms are harmful to other patrons in that they increase costs for all due to artificially increased demand, while also lessening the advantage true onsite guests get. Especially if the majority of the throwaway rooms are booked as 10 people. That adds more people to the system than disney likely anticipated, since I'm sure disney calculates that most tent sites typically have an average of 4-6 people.

With that said, the number of people that can take advantage of throw away rooms via campsites is limited, so it probably isn't that big of a deal. The SDFP issue was likely causing many more issues bc of the sheer amount of people that could do it was much higher.

 

[jade1]

I'm willing to bet that Fort Wilderness ** campsites ** have the highest occupancy percentage of any WDW hotel on an annual basis. ** The cabins are nowhere near as popular. **

Edited for the areas inside the stars

And has it "increased" because of this very thing? And if so, how much? Like was it typically only about 1/2 the campsites used in the past? Or was it always packed (sold out).

 

[jknezek]

And has it "increased" because of this very thing? And if so, how much? Like was it typically only about 1/2 the campsites used in the past? Or was it always packed (sold out).

The campground has been obscenely popular since I was a kid in the 80s. I know there was a time in the 70s when they had conventions and things in the campground, indicating that it wasn't always full, but as far back as I can remember I can't remember ever showing up and seeing obvious open campsites as much as I have since the early 2000s. Which is incredible considering how hard it is to get a reservation. The removal of a cabin loop for campsites recently shows Disney has at least recognized the popular of RVs versus cabins.

 

[DonaldDuck77]

Make campsites 2 nights minimum. Whenever the system will allow it, cancel any FP booked before 30 days on any room that is cancelled later. That would probably eliminate 99% of throwaway campsite bookings. Until then, if you want to book a campsite, do it early.

 

[rteetz]

Make campsites 2 nights minimum. Whenever the system will allow it, cancel any FP booked before 30 days on any room that is cancelled later. That would probably eliminate 99% of throwaway campsite bookings. Until then, if you want to book a campsite, do it early.

I don't know about that. My guess is most campsite bookings aren't for a week or longer. I would think actually campers are only spending 1-4 nights camping. I think making it a minimum two nights would hurt sales.

 

[AngiTN]

I don't know about that. My guess is most campsite bookings aren't for a week or longer. I would think actually campers are only spending 1-4 nights camping. I think making it a minimum two nights would hurt sales.

Yeah, the only solution, and it seems like it would be a very easy one to implement, benefits for on site stays only last as long as the on site stay.
The biggest hurdle will be a way to limit it in regards to FP, since that's tied more to ticket entitlements vs. room nights. Room nights are what unlock it. But if they can put the limit on it for ADR surely they can do it for FP too, somehow