The Great 'Throwaway Room' Debate

[famy27]

There's a distinct change in tone since I was last here. Which makes something very obvious. The reasons cited for allowing this practice have been:

1. It's there
2. It doesn't hurt anyone
3. Everyone else does it
4. It's been going on for a long time.
5. But it's just like when... (Insert bad analogy here)

Sound familiar? These are not reasons, but typical excuses people use to justify their behavior.

On a different note, I called Disney back. I had many lengthy conversations with many different people. Too lengthy, and too many to recite back, so here are the interesting bits:

1. Disney does not condone this practice.
2. They are trying to close the loophole.
3. All calls are recorded and monitored. Any CM promoting or allowing this practice would have been reprimanded or fired.
4. Guest need to physically stay in their rooms. This is a safety issue. Disney needs to know who is on property in event of emergency.
5. This is a growing concern. There have been a number of guest complaints that this practice done by others has had a negative impact on their visit.
6. Any guest doing online checkin only or canceling their reservation lose all perks, FP reservations will be cancelled.

At no time during my conversation did I ever get conflicting information.

So go ahead and dismiss it, I know you will. It's clear that people are only here to dismiss, not discuss.

So that brings me full circle to my original post:
"The word 'loophole' is synonymous with the words 'cheating' and 'evasion' for a reason."

It's fine if you are one who believes there's nothing unethical about exploiting loopholes. Go ahead and continue to do this. But don't make the argument that Disney allows this to happen, therefore it's not a loophole, therefore it's not unethical... because you can't.

That's all I have to say on the subject. I will not be discussing this further.

So how about someone who books one night and sleeps in the room? How long do you need to sleep there? How does Disney know who's in the room at any given time (for "safety")? You aren't in your room 24/7, so there are always going to be empty rooms at any give time, even if the resort is at 100 occupancy.

 

[jcb]

I'm just wondering how Disney, short of clairvoyance, is going to police whether a guest intends on staying in the room or not.

Let's assume the practice is as Pete described, the throwaway guest books one throwaway night but buys a 10 day park hopper ticket. (If Pete is wrong, that just makes it much harder for Disney so I'm throwing Disney as an easy one).

As long as the guest doesn't say something stupid while booking the reservation and the guest checks physically in, Disney simply can't know whether or not the guest will be staying in the room.

If the guest checks in, then Disney has to ascertain whether the guest actually "stayed" in the room. Short of putting cameras in each room (and making every trial lawyer in Florida rich) how will Disney ascertain whether the guest actually stayed in the room?

How will Disney define stay? Is it enough that, upon check-in, the throwaway guest goes into the room to put the check-in materials in the trash can?

Will Disney cancel the remaining tickets based solely upon mousekeeping's report that the room did not look lived in?

Suppose I'm an extremely fastidious person (this is my hypothetical and I can make up fantastic facts if I want) who can't leave a hotel room without removing all trace of my existence. Am I at risk of having my tickets canceled?

Suppose, as I mentioned, it is a 24 hour night. Will there be an exception to the "stay" requirement here?

I just see the "fix" for this being much worse than the problem.

Am I missing anything?

 

[WebmasterMike]

I'm just wondering how Disney, short of clairvoyance, is going to police whether a guest intends on staying in the room or not.

Let's assume the practice is as Pete described, the throwaway guest books one throwaway night but buys a 10 day park hopper ticket. (If Pete is wrong, that just makes it much harder for Disney so I'm throwing Disney as an easy one).

As long as the guest doesn't say something stupid while booking the reservation and the guest checks physically in, Disney simply can't know whether or not the guest will be staying in the room.

If the guest checks in, then Disney has to ascertain whether the guest actually "stayed" in the room. Short of putting cameras in each room (and making every trial lawyer in Florida rich) how will Disney ascertain whether the guest actually stayed in the room?

How will Disney define stay? Is it enough that, upon check-in, the throwaway guest goes into the room to put the check-in materials in the trash can?

Will Disney cancel the remaining tickets based solely upon mousekeeping's report that the room did not look lived in?

Suppose I'm an extremely fastidious person (this is my hypothetical and I can make up fantastic facts if I want) who can't leave a hotel room without removing all trace of my existence. Am I at risk of having my tickets canceled?

Suppose, as I mentioned, it is a 24 hour night. Will there be an exception to the "stay" requirement here?

I just see the "fix" for this being much worse than the problem.

Am I missing anything?

Chip Dale, Potato Potato, Tomato tomato,

 

[jcb]

Chip Dale, Potato Potato, Tomato tomato,

And I was so hoping you would explain how WDW could cheaply install magic band readers outside of each guest room to monitor entry and exit.

 

[nugov2]

There's a distinct change in tone since I was last here. Which makes something very obvious. The reasons cited for allowing this practice have been:

1. It's there
2. It doesn't hurt anyone
3. Everyone else does it
4. It's been going on for a long time.
5. But it's just like when... (Insert bad analogy here)

Sound familiar? These are not reasons, but typical excuses people use to justify their behavior.

On a different note, I called Disney back. I had many lengthy conversations with many different people. Too lengthy, and too many to recite back, so here are the interesting bits:

1. Disney does not condone this practice.
2. They are trying to close the loophole.
3. All calls are recorded and monitored. Any CM promoting or allowing this practice would
have been reprimanded or fired.
4. Guest need to physically stay in their rooms. This is a safety issue. Disney needs to know who is on property in event of emergency.
5. This is a growing concern. There have been a number of guest complaints that this practice done by others has had a negative impact on their visit.
6. Any guest doing online checkin only or canceling their reservation lose all perks, FP reservations will be cancelled.

At no time during my conversation did I ever get conflicting information.

So go ahead and dismiss it, I know you will. It's clear that people are only here to dismiss, not discuss.

So that brings me full circle to my original post:
"The word 'loophole' is synonymous with the words 'cheating' and 'evasion' for a reason."

It's fine if you are one who believes there's nothing unethical about exploiting loopholes. Go ahead and continue to do this. But don't make the argument that Disney allows this to happen, therefore it's not a loophole, therefore it's not unethical... because you can't.

That's all I have to say on the subject. I will not be discussing this further.

It's so weird because I spoke with a supervisor and asked of I booked a week but wasn't sure if I would be in my room at all because I had family in the area, but booked a hotel for the week just in case would they at any time check me out due to inactivity and she stated no. If the room is paid for and checked into they don't look any further than that. That was last week. I called yet again out of curiosity and was once again told the almost identical thing. I even got a good laugh from the cm when I asked about if they monitor if a room is used by your magic band. So I guess this puts us at an impass.

As far as Disney monitoring who is in there rooms for safety. .well If you say gullible slowly, it sounds like oranges

 

[nugov2]

Dbl post

Remind me not to post from my phone. It is a PITA

 

[robinb]

And I was so hoping you would explain how WDW could cheaply install magic band readers outside of each guest room to monitor entry and exit.

They are already there!

 

[jcb]

They are already there!

You are absolutely right.

My understanding is that while the RFID reader is now part of the door lock, the information isn't automatically transmitted to the front desk. Certainly, WDW could find out who entered a room and by means of accessing the Magic Band reader but is that information sent in real time to the front desk or does it have to be retrieved?

And even so, what's to stop a throwaway guest for passing by the room and opening the door on their way back to their offsite resort?

 

[Luckybee]

Slightly off topic but not really...I find it astounding that when someone doesn't like something, a company policy, rule, loophole or whatever one wishes to call it, and this is one of those cases , that there are those who resort to referring to people as "cheats" , "unethical" etc.

I think that it is wonderful that some are calling Disney and complaining. If one is unhappy with something that a company is doing then one should complain to the company. But once you get past the age of 12 you know(or should know) that trying to legislate morality on a message board isn't going to get you very far. In my world(this isn't it) I am concerned about my ethics. In my profession I would be concerned if someone even suggested I was doing something unethical( would never happen but...) .Here it has no impact particularly so when I find that the definition of ethics change depending on the thread.
As an example of this I was sent a link to a thread last night that made me laugh. A poster on this thread had suggested to someone that they should in order to get a military discount book in a manner that I would consider much more of a loophole than a throwaway would ever be. This is a poster who has been quite adamant about their position against throwaway rooms. Im not going to link to the thread because my point here isn't to call anyone out. I mention it because it is the perfect example of what I was referring to . Im am sure that poster saw absolutely nothing wrong with their suggestion, but that said everyone has their own opinion on what "ethics" are and are not and the old adage of "he who cast the first stone" should be imho considered by all.

 

[nugov2]

Slightly off topic but not really...I find it astounding that when someone doesn't like something, a company policy, rule, loophole or whatever one wishes to call it, and this is one of those cases , that there are those who resort to referring to people as "cheats" , "unethical" etc.

I think that it is wonderful that some are calling Disney and complaining. If one is unhappy with something that a company is doing then one should complain to the company. But once you get past the age of 12 you know(or should know) that trying to legislate morality on a message board isn't going to get you very far. In my world(this isn't it) I am concerned about my ethics. In my profession I would be concerned if someone even suggested I was doing something unethical( would never happen but...) .Here it has no impact particularly so when I find that the definition of ethics change depending on the thread.
As an example of this I was sent a link to a thread last night that made me laugh. A poster on this thread had suggested to someone that they should in order to get a military discount book in a manner that I would consider much more of a loophole than a throwaway would ever be. This is a poster who has been quite adamant about their position against throwaway rooms. Im not going to link to the thread because my point here isn't to call anyone out. I mention it because it is the perfect example of what I was referring to . Im am sure that poster saw absolutely nothing wrong with their suggestion, but that said everyone has their own opinion on what "ethics" are and are not and the old adage of "he who cast the first stone" should be imho considered by all.

Good point! That is funny because on the last thread about this before discussion was banned a poster flaming those who do this the most also promoted another "loophole" of booking someone in a room under another family members name with less people in it to avoid the extra fee and then sleep in the other room. So avoiding a room fee by lying on a reservation=ok while booking, paying for, but not sleeping in a room=unethical for that poster. Strange, but true.

 

[famy27]

Slightly off topic but not really...I find it astounding that when someone doesn't like something, a company policy, rule, loophole or whatever one wishes to call it, and this is one of those cases , that there are those who resort to referring to people as "cheats" , "unethical" etc.

I think that it is wonderful that some are calling Disney and complaining. If one is unhappy with something that a company is doing then one should complain to the company. But once you get past the age of 12 you know(or should know) that trying to legislate morality on a message board isn't going to get you very far. In my world(this isn't it) I am concerned about my ethics. In my profession I would be concerned if someone even suggested I was doing something unethical( would never happen but...) .Here it has no impact particularly so when I find that the definition of ethics change depending on the thread.
As an example of this I was sent a link to a thread last night that made me laugh. A poster on this thread had suggested to someone that they should in order to get a military discount book in a manner that I would consider much more of a loophole than a throwaway would ever be. This is a poster who has been quite adamant about their position against throwaway rooms. Im not going to link to the thread because my point here isn't to call anyone out. I mention it because it is the perfect example of what I was referring to . Im am sure that poster saw absolutely nothing wrong with their suggestion, but that said everyone has their own opinion on what "ethics" are and are not and the old adage of "he who cast the first stone" should be imho considered by all.

And I think that people think it's unethical just because it's happening at WDW. I've never seen anyone outraged over throwaways at Comfort Suites Atlantis, Universal, Vegas pools, airport parking, local festivals, etc. I can't figure out what makes WDW different. I especially like the airport hotel parking analogy. Some hotels offer 14 nights worth of parking near the airport with a one-night hotel stay. I don't see how that is any different than 10 days of rolling FP access with a one-night stay. Nobody is protesting the cars parked at the Holiday Inn, yelling about how the travelers have found a loophole and are getting two weeks of benefits for a one-night stay.

 

[WebmasterMike]

You are absolutely right.

My understanding is that while the RFID reader is now part of the door lock, the information isn't automatically transmitted to the front desk. Certainly, WDW could find out who entered a room and by means of accessing the Magic Band reader but is that information sent in real time to the front desk or does it have to be retrieved?

And even so, what's to stop a throwaway guest for passing by the room and opening the door on their way back to their offsite resort?

I am sure there are Long Range, active RFID readers strategically placed to gather data of who is at a specific resort. I miss the days when my RFID transponder would play a sound when it was read by an active sensor.

 

[JoeyAnyc]

Wow, I just learned about this today while watching the last few podcast videos. I won't judge anyone or label them.

For me, it's not a procedure I would do. #1 regardless if I paid for the room, I would feel bad that someone couldn't get a room reservation because of my actions (of course would be different if I actually stayed there). #2 when it comes to FP+, I would feel like I'm jumping the line that I'm not entitled to. With these feelings, I wouldn't get the same pleasure out of my ride experiences. That's just me. We do live in a world where we gotta do what we gotta do. When it affects other people, and them missing out, that's where I draw my line. I'm not better or worse than anyone. Just my choice. Plus I love staying on Disney property

 

[Luckybee]

Wow, I just learned about this today while watching the last few podcast videos. I won't judge anyone or label them.

For me, it's not a procedure I would do. #1 regardless if I paid for the room, I would feel bad that someone couldn't get a room reservation because of my actions (of course would be different if I actually stayed there). #2 when it comes to FP+, I would feel like I'm jumping the line that I'm not entitled to. With these feelings, I wouldn't get the same pleasure out of my ride experiences. That's just me. We do live in a world where we gotta do what we gotta do. When it affects other people, and them missing out, that's where I draw my line. I'm not better or worse than anyone. Just my choice. Plus I love staying on Disney property

And this is why/how we're all different. Im not a fan of Disney properties. Last trip we stayed in Marriott timeshares because we happened to deposit our Aruba weeks when we couldn't travel a previous yr and I'll take free anytime . Normally however we tend to do luxury properties and as pretty as some of the D properties are for the price they charge I expect luxury service. When I can get the 4 seasons, Ritz etc. for a better price with that level of service for a better price it becomes a no brainer for my taste. On the other hand this past trip we spent 1 night at Loews Portofino (as a vacation from our vacation) to try out Universal and quite frankly it was again, for my taste way above anything Disney has from a service perspective. I wouldn't hesitate in staying there again.
Quite frankly I think D is eventually going to go in the same direction as U for FP's. They don't have the capacity to do complete fp's but you'll eventually see perhaps, 3 at the 60 day mark for off property guests for a fee, and perhaps extra fp's for a fee.They already know people are willing to pay for them, they've been using their customers as a test market for heavens sake. imho it is inevitable and would explain why they have tied the 60 days to the length of ticket instead of nights on property.

 

[cjbcam]

I guess I don't understand why someone would pay for two places to sleep on the same night. I am to cheap to do that. If I wanted the benefits that bad I would stay my first night there, then move to to the next place the next day.
My kids love the Disney resorts so I don't think we will stay off site ever.

 

[Ali]

I guess I don't understand why someone would pay for two places to sleep on the same night. I am to cheap to do that. If I wanted the benefits that bad I would stay my first night there, then move to to the next place the next day.

Well, think it through a bit. If someone books a campsite for a night, they can get 10 magic bands (with names entered into the system of course) and those can be used for FPP in the parks and for the early FPP creations with long tickets. If you need a room for 10 people on Disney property you need a lot of money for a 3 bedroom place or you need several rooms. So most likely those people are renting a house offsite. And let's admit it, everyone wants to wear a MB around now, it's like the star bellied sneeches and keeping up with the Joneses so they are saving $12.95 plus tax for each band they get from the campsite throwaway. So for thr price of 1 night at a campsite ranging from 60 to 100 dollars they just made money. And they get to have earlier FPP. WOW what a deal!

And why would a large group of people who already have a nice big rental someplace else want to stay at a campsite for a night and tear it down the next day with that many people? I wouldn't want to do it. If they got a throwaway value room they only get 4 MBs so it isn't as good of a deal for big families.

So, that's my thoughts. Have a happy time wherever you are!

 

[Luckybee]

I guess I don't understand why someone would pay for two places to sleep on the same night. I am to cheap to do that. If I wanted the benefits that bad I would stay my first night there, then move to to the next place the next day.
My kids love the Disney resorts so I don't think we will stay off site ever.

Simple for us.....just dh and I, we prefer offsite accommodation and for the price of a 1 night stay we can do 60 day advance fp's for length of ticket. After what I saw on our last trip trying to make some changes at the 30 day mark there is no question that if we ever plan a Disney focused trip again we definitely would do this. Even if we booked a room as opposed to a campsite the price would be worth it to us if we're getting at least a couple of days of fp's out of it.
Its the same reason why some (us) will always pay the extra for express pass at Universal if we're not staying onsite(altho I must admit that express is so much better since it includes more passes, but then again you pay much more for it)

 

[Luckybee]

Well, think it through a bit. If someone books a campsite for a night, they can get 10 magic bands (with names entered into the system of course) and those can be used for FPP in the parks and for the early FPP creations with long tickets. If you need a room for 10 people on Disney property you need a lot of money for a 3 bedroom place or you need several rooms. So most likely those people are renting a house offsite. And let's admit it, everyone wants to wear a MB around now, it's like the star bellied sneeches and keeping up with the Joneses so they are saving $12.95 plus tax for each band they get from the campsite throwaway. So for thr price of 1 night at a campsite ranging from 60 to 100 dollars they just made money. And they get to have earlier FPP. WOW what a deal!

And why would a large group of people who already have a nice big rental someplace else want to stay at a campsite for a night and tear it down the next day with that many people? I wouldn't want to do it. If they got a throwaway value room they only get 4 MBs so it isn't as good of a deal for big families.

So, that's my thoughts. Have a happy time wherever you are!

Ummm I wouldn't wear one....didn't last trip....wont in the future...used our tickets for fp's..and I'd only book for the 2 of us.

Why do so many think that this is about saving money. I'd hazard a guess that the majority of people who are prepared to book a "true" throwaway are not doing it to save money, rather its because they don't wish to stay in the Disney bubble.
Aside from the fact that we prefer offsite hotels, we also prefer more peace and quiet than a Disney hotel can offer us. While we're at the parks we deal with the level of noise that Disney brings but when Im sitting by a pool I love that there are places that have a more "adult" ambience

 

[Dean1953]

For our holiday trip, I booked Memory Maker. With Magic Bands, ride photos are automatically sent to my MDE. We are upgrading to Annual Passes on our first day. Magic Bands are sent with AP's, not given at purchase. I got the throwaway room to get the MB (once they are sent, I'll cancel and then book FP's). When I buy the AP's, I'll tell the CM not to bother sending the MB's. Is this unethical?

 

[robinb]

I guess I don't understand why someone would pay for two places to sleep on the same night. I am to cheap to do that. If I wanted the benefits that bad I would stay my first night there, then move to to the next place the next day.
My kids love the Disney resorts so I don't think we will stay off site ever.

Many off-site house and condo rentals are for 1-week increments.