3 Women get into a brawl at Test Track

[mcjaco]

WTH is wrong with people?!

Park Admission $100 per person
Lunch with characters $225
Getting beat about the head with a souvenir parasol in the SB line... Priceless

And we wonder why they're trying to price certain groups out......

 

[Josh Hendy]

I don't know nor do I need to know. I don't even know if that's what Disney is doing (What I suggested above) but I think it's reasonable to assume. What I do know, is that Disney is doing what they believe to be best for their overall bottom line. Ejecting/banning people from the park doesn't make them money and could even cost them money (in potential litigation) and probably to the "Bystanders" of an incident the fact that someone was banned/ejected or not probably will NOT impact their overall "Spending" at Disney. Only if people truly don't feel safe at Disney will it really have an impact. Since these types of incidents are not widespread (at least from the perspective of the average visitor) I don't see the "Safeness" factor being an issue.

The urban explorer got banned about a year ago. I don't believe he got any warning, however he was notorious for trespassing backstage at WDW and on other properties and posting videos on youtube.

The young people were warned to leave DTD but were found still on the property later so were escorted off and then banned. It was maybe 5 years ago, and it was something of a hyped incident because one of the kids was a well-known university football player and his Mom worked at Disney.

 

[peg110]

The urban explorer got banned about a year ago. I don't believe he got any warning, however he was notorious for trespassing backstage at WDW and on other properties and posting videos on youtube.

The young people were warned to leave DTD but were found still on the property later so were escorted off and then banned. It was maybe 5 years ago, and it was something of a hyped incident because one of the kids was a well-known university football player and his Mom worked at Disney.

And the key for each of them identifies a "Pattern". Notorious and Warned. The first sounds like Disney protecting proprietary information. Trespassing could have gotten him arrested and fined and BANNED instead of just banned.

Don't know why the kids were "Warned" to leave. I would hope that Disney had a valid reason.

 

[Josh Hendy]

And the key for each of them identifies a "Pattern". Notorious and Warned. The first sounds like Disney protecting proprietary information. Trespassing could have gotten him arrested and fined and BANNED instead of just banned.

Don't know why the kids were "Warned" to leave. I would hope that Disney had a valid reason.

Most likely the kids were asked to leave because they were loitering i.e. hanging around DTD and not eating, drinking or spending in the shops. Possibly the kids were acting somewhat loud and disruptive, sitting around in a group that looked like a rowdy gang.

As for the brawlers, it's different from the other cases because it was a felony. Trespassing and loitering are misdemeanors because they are annoying but otherwise harmless. If someone commits a felony on your property, meaning they commit serious harm or endangerment to life and property, do you sit back and wait to see if it's a "pattern" ? Apparently Disney does, at least if the mayhem is guest-on-guest and not guest-on-employee or guest-on-Disney-property.

 

[peg110]

Most likely the kids were asked to leave because they were loitering i.e. hanging around DTD and not eating, drinking or spending in the shops. Possibly the kids were acting somewhat loud and disruptive, sitting around in a group that looked like a rowdy gang.

As for the brawlers, it's different from the other cases because it was a felony. Trespassing and loitering are misdemeanors because they are annoying but otherwise harmless. If someone commits a felony on your property, meaning they commit serious harm or endangerment to life and property, do you sit back and wait to see if it's a "pattern" ? Apparently Disney does, at least if the mayhem is guest-on-guest and not guest-on-employee or guest-on-Disney-property.

I am not saying I disagree, but you really don't know. It's only a Felony (assault?) if someone presses charges. Since it appeared to be a "Mutual Affray" it's not likely that either of the parties involved are going to file charges against each other. Disney probably could file a complaint of "Disturbing the peace" or something along that lines. Again, however, I am certain they are thinking with the bottom line in mind.

In either case, we (or most of us anyway) can only surmise as to the motivations of why Disney management handled it the way they did. It doesn't really matter. Part of the "Public" will think they did the right thing, part will think they did the wrong thing, and part won't care (or don't even know). Either way, if there is a law suit or not, I am not involved in it.