FP + What we know and what we want to know

Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no need to re-hash old debates about why those things were on the old FP. You can search this forum for those explanations. And it is your right to disagree with them.

The old system evolved, for whatever reason. The new system, imo, is specifically to generate more revenue. This new system is far to complicated to only address percieved issues with old FP usage.

You were the one asserting their was no abuse in the past. I wasnt trying to rehash old debates merely responding to your most recent assertions.

And we are in agreement, this new system is far too complicated to only address the REAL issues with FPs in the past. They made changes that they feel will drive more revenue and I can see we are in agreement with that.
 
You were the one asserting their was no abuse in the past. I wasnt trying to rehash old debates merely responding to your most recent assertions.

And we are in agreement, this new system is far too complicated to only address the REAL issues with FPs in the past. They made changes that they feel will drive more revenue and I can see we are in agreement with that.

The only agreement we have (with abuse), is the abuse revolved around the selling of FP. There was no other abuse, imo. You can say all you want that gathering FP was abuse, but you are not going to get many people to agree with you. Same goes for late FP use.

Disney allowed it, you can call it abuse if you want, Disney certainly didn't see it that way.
 
I think we can now just dispense with all the arguments about what did and didn't qualify as abuse. It is irrelevant now, much like the debates on late FP returns and whether it was a "policy" or a "procedure" or a "guideline" or whatever.

The new system is coming. It puts an end to practices that some believe were abuse and others don't, but no matter what it is coming to an end.

Actually, given the Part II thread is already started, the moderators can just close this thread when they get the chance.
 
The only agreement we have (with abuse), is the abuse revolved around the selling of FP. There was no other abuse, imo. You can say all you want that gathering FP was abuse, but you are not going to get many people to agree with you. Same goes for late FP use.

Disney allowed it, you can call it abuse if you want, Disney certainly didn't see it that way.

I didnt say late FP usage was abuse. I do not believe it was. I do not think,however, that late FP usage is not what Disney had in mind when they first rolled out the FP system but it evolved over time and it became a matter of guest recovery to allow late FP usage.

People's agreement or disagreement with me doesn't change the fact that Disney specifically had the words "non-transferable" on all of their FPs. That means the intent was to not "transfer" FPs to another person. The transferring of FPs was abuse by the simple definition of:

"The improper use of something."

You dont have to agree with that but it doesn't change the rule that is plainly printed on the FP
 


I didnt say late FP usage was abuse. I do not believe it was. I do not think,however, that late FP usage is not what Disney had in mind when they first rolled out the FP system but it evolved over time and it became a matter of guest recovery to allow late FP usage.

People's agreement or disagreement with me doesn't change the fact that Disney specifically had the words "non-transferable" on all of their FPs. That means the intent was to not "transfer" FPs to another person. The transferring of FPs was abuse by the simple definition of:

"The improper use of something."

You dont have to agree with that but it doesn't change the rule that is plainly printed on the FP

You realize the same people ignoring a printed obvious actual policy are the same one arguing the validity of a "policy" they believe that was never in print..?

Again, it's just about whatever suits them at the moment. It's not rude to point out the obvious. Seriously, in their world does anyone pointing out they're wrong ever constitute an affront?

Wow, strange little misguided view of the world.
 
I think we can now just dispense with all the arguments about what did and didn't qualify as abuse. It is irrelevant now, much like the debates on late FP returns and whether it was a "policy" or a "procedure" or a "guideline" or whatever.

The new system is coming. It puts an end to practices that some believe were abuse and others don't, but no matter what it is coming to an end.

Actually, given the Part II thread is already started, the moderators can just close this thread when they get the chance.

Just curious. Where were your calls to stop the arguments about FP usage on page 194 of this thread where people, including Robo were rehashing old FP late usage arguments? Was it because these people were on your side of previous debates?

Interesting....
 


Just curious. Where were your calls to stop the arguments about FP usage on page 194 of this thread where people, including Robo were rehashing old FP late usage arguments? Was it because these people were on your side of previous debates?

Interesting....

Umm...maybe I wasn't online at the time? Maybe I was too busy to bother rehashing it?

Man, you just need to keep pushing it it seems.
 
You realize the same people ignoring a printed obvious actual policy are the same one arguing the validity of a "policy" they believe that was never in print..?

Again, it's just about whatever suits them at the moment. It's not rude to point out the obvious. Seriously, in their world does anyone pointing out they're wrong ever constitute an affront?

Wow, strange little misguided view of the world.

Yes, I do realize that. Same people that seem to fail to understand the difference between actual policy versus any guest recovery methods that are put in place to address specific issues.

The same people that claim they never broke ANY Disney rules. Well, except the rules that didnt really matter or apply to them or of course they didnt agree with.

It certainly is a worldview that I cant comprehend.
 
Umm...maybe I wasn't online at the time? Maybe I was too busy to bother rehashing it?

Man, you just need to keep pushing it it seems.

Maybe if it gets posted in larger typeface...
 
Well, the threads were created in an attempt at serious discussion and tracking of the implementation of the new system. Too bad they got sidetracked immediately by people hoping to drown out the factual information with their drinking games and cat calls.

Since I am one of the "boozers" on the thread, I'll answer.

The "drinking games" were started in an attempt to lighten up the sometimes very contentious mood on this thread. A mood, sir, that you have greatly contributed to setting.

If you want to present factual information or even dispute our speculations/discussions about how it will affect us, feel free. But let's leave the name-calling out of it.

Coming back simply to :stir: is NOT helpful.
 
Maybe if you didn't get so bent out of shape over the times when you're not the primary source of info on the forums to the point that you have to post incessant meaningless drivel into those threads to feel a part of them..


Train wreck complete.

Heading over to catch the new train. :goodvibes
 
Since I am one of the "boozers" on the thread, I'll answer.

The "drinking games" were started in an attempt to lighten up the sometimes very contentious mood on this thread. A mood, sir, that you have greatly contributed to setting.

If you want to present factual information or even dispute our speculations/discussions about how it will affect us, feel free. But let's leave the name-calling out of it.

Coming back simply to :stir: is NOT helpful.

Isn't that what you just did? You really need to take more of your own advice.. you contradict yourself constantly.

And where, pray tell, was there name calling?
 
I think the 'pay to play' mentioned late last night is the other shoe dropping.

US and basically every other theme park charges something for their version of FP. Disney was giving it away for free. Don't you think they wanted to get some return on that? People were paying many hundreds of $ for a stay in a deluxe, and complaining "there were no FPs available when I showed up! Do you know how much I paid for this? I deserve better! I'll go to US where they are happy to take my money and give me superior benefits."

And Disney was giving the best FP perks away for free to people who probably didn't spend as much (I know I sure didn't.)

I think a valid ticket will get us some minimal FP+, and staying on-site or at a fancier resort will get you more.

As a family of 5, we always stay off-site ($75 for a 3 bedroom condo instead of $300 a night for anywhere at Disney). I'm disappointed, but I understand the business reasons behind it.

The mouse wants his cheese.

I really think this is something they are going to look at. Rather than free dining to get guests to stay onsite (which actually costs real money) they could give out extra FP+ (which add zero extra costs to the system once it is already in place). Seems like an easy way to increase revenue.

Now what will they do for DVC owner? If nothing, how will that impact their sales. What they could do though is say direct purchasers get the perk and resale purchasers don't.
 
Somewhere in this thread, rumor and hearsay turned into "info".

How this thread remains open boggles the mind.
 
Yes, I do realize that. Same people that seem to fail to understand the difference between actual policy versus any guest recovery methods that are put in place to address specific issues.

The same people that claim they never broke ANY Disney rules. Well, except the rules that didnt really matter or apply to them or of course they didnt agree with.

It certainly is a worldview that I cant comprehend.

Wow..I'm sorry, but that's just rude. Honestly, I never thought I was breaking any disney rules by passing on a FP when we couldn't use it. Obviously we were, but that doesn't mean my view of the world is that rules don't matter or apply to me if I don't agree with them. TBH, I never took the time to read anything other than the return time on the FPs. I doubt I'm the only one.
 
Anyone who would like to explain how they stand to make a billion+ on this whole thing, feel free. I'm not seeing it.

30,000 hotel rooms * 365 days * $20/day = $219,000,000

While totally made up numbers, if they can use this to increase the revenuce they get from each hotel room every day of the year it could add up to a lot.

Or taking all Disney parks attendence at 121,400,000 annually (2011 numbers from Wikipedia), if they can turn that in to a couple of extra dollars from each guest, it adds up quickly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top