Buying multiple tickets for more fastpasses

[magicbob]

What's the difference if you buy 3 bags of flour when there's 3 left or 3 bags of flour when there's 6 left? At some point that flour is going to run out (before they can restock it again). It seems that to follow your logic and the point you're trying to make, you should never be buying more than one bag because at some point your extra purchase will cause someone to lose out. If I'm following what you're saying, it shouldn't make a difference how much of a limited resource there is left, you still shouldn't take more than your one.

Applying your flour example to WDW, doesn't that mean that you would have no problem with people buying additional FP if they are not taking the last ones?

Not taking sides... but this discussion reminded me of what my little brother used to pull when we were kids.

He would leave one potato chip in the bag, or one M&M in the candy bowl, etc.

When my mother would say "WHO ate all the CHIPS!?!?!?!?" he would honestly say, "not me" because he had not eaten ALL the chips. The last one was still there!

 

[cygnusx1jg]

To give a more concrete example I view it like this. I decide I'm going to do some baking but I need to get flour. I normally have several (5 or 6) five pound bags of flour in my cupboard but I have used it all and need to restock. I'm only going to bake a cake so I don't need much today but decide I might as well restock now so I don't have to do it later. I get to the store and find there are only 3 bags of flour on the shelf. I was planning to buy 5 or 6 so do I clear the shelf of all 3? No, I think it's rude. I get the 1 I need and buy the rest needed to replenish my supplies when there is more available.

If the store is bought out of flour I can get more the next day or go to the store down the street and get some.

If you buy the 3 bags at store #1, why is it a big deal for the other person who needs flour to go down the street to store #2? Or even ask the store clerk at #1 to see if they have any more flour in the back.

 

[Turn the Page]

This is where the conversation breaks down. It is okay to say that you choose not to do something because you are looking out for others, but when you say that others choosing to act differently is "rude", you are now calling others rude because they feel differently than you. Reasonable people can look at the exact same thing and see something different.

One or the other need not be "rude". To decide that people who see something differently than you are "rude" is to do two things - 1: call them names and 2: judge them to be less than you for making a different choice.

It is your right to do both, but is that really your intent? You seem to be a very thoughtful person. Consider what you are doing here.

That particular nuance was not lost on me.

If you prefer, I will say it more blatantly.

If one engages in behavior such as lying about the number of people in their room to get their hands on multiple magic bands so they can buy multiple tickets in order to get more fast passes because they don't like the fact that they get 3 FP+'s with their one ticket then yes, I think that is rude, the person doing it is rude and frankly selfish.

Does it make me rude for thinking that? Perhaps. I'm not going to pretend that I am always the most polite person in the world. I have been known to be rude in the past and I am quite certain I will be rude at some point in the future. Heck, I am pretty sure I could be being rude right now. But, I do try to consider how my actions affect others and make an attempt to not do things that would affect others negatively just because I can and have the money to do them. It's especially rude to do them when you have to twist, bend, or flat out break rules, laws, or policies to do them.

I don't care if you're (again, collective you, not your specifically) on vacation or not. Everyone else there is on vacation too. I don't care if you did spent thousands to go there and you want to have fun. You know what? So did just about everybody else. Your money is not better than mine or the thousands of other people there that day. Why are you entitled to lie and cheat to get what you want at the expense of others?

 

[mesaboy2]

That particular nuance was not lost on me.

If you prefer, I will say it more blatantly.

If one engages in behavior such as lying about the number of people in their room to get their hands on multiple magic bands so they can buy multiple tickets in order to get more fast passes because they don't like the fact that they get 3 FP+'s with their one ticket then yes, I think that is rude, the person doing it is rude and frankly selfish.

Does it make me rude for thinking that? Perhaps. I'm not going to pretend that I am always the most polite person in the world. I have been known to be rude in the past and I am quite certain I will be rude at some point in the future. Heck, I am pretty sure I could be being rude right now. But, I do try to consider how my actions affect others and make an attempt to not do things that would affect others negatively just because I can and have the money to do them. It's especially rude to do them when you have to twist, bend, or flat out break rules, laws, or policies to do them.

I don't care if you're (again, collective you, not your specifically) on vacation or not. Everyone else there is on vacation too. I don't care if you did spent thousands to go there and you want to have fun. You know what? So did just about everybody else. Your money is not better than mine or the thousands of other people there that day. Why are you entitled to lie and cheat to get what you want at the expense of others?

For what it's worth, you strike me as a very conscientious person. But I think it is possible to be too conscientious.

 

[Turn the Page]

Not taking sides... but this discussion reminded me of what my little brother used to pull when we were kids.

He would leave one potato chip in the bag, or one M&M in the candy bowl, etc.

When my mother would say "WHO ate all the CHIPS!?!?!?!?" he would honestly say, "not me" because he had not eaten ALL the chips. The last one was still there!

HAHAHAAH!!!!! Kids say the darndest things.

 

[Turn the Page]

For what it's worth, you strike me as a very conscientious person. But I think it is possible to be too conscientious.

Hey, nobody is perfect. I try to be aware of my faults and leverage them but it doesn't always work....this discussion is probably a case in point.

I suppose there are worse faults to have.

 

[fitzperry]

There is a difference between taking enough of a finite resource to suit your needs and the spaces running out and you taking up two or three times what you need at the exclusion of others.

Is it splitting hairs? Perhaps. I see a difference, clearly you don't.

Oh gee, I guess I'm really showing my political leanings now aren't I?

The problem with this logic is you're imposing YOUR definition of "needs" on others (and in a context where we're not really talking about "needs" at all--i.e., spaces in a tour or seats at a restaurant at WDW, as opposed to bottled water and canned goods during a hurricane, etc.)

 

[mom2rtk]

Not taking sides... but this discussion reminded me of what my little brother used to pull when we were kids.

He would leave one potato chip in the bag, or one M&M in the candy bowl, etc.

When my mother would say "WHO ate all the CHIPS!?!?!?!?" he would honestly say, "not me" because he had not eaten ALL the chips. The last one was still there!

He's an attorney now, right?

 

[JimmyV]

To give a more concrete example I view it like this. I decide I'm going to do some baking but I need to get flour. I normally have several (5 or 6) five pound bags of flour in my cupboard but I have used it all and need to restock. I'm only going to bake a cake so I don't need much today but decide I might as well restock now so I don't have to do it later. I get to the store and find there are only 3 bags of flour on the shelf. I was planning to buy 5 or 6 so do I clear the shelf of all 3? No, I think it's rude. I get the 1 I need and buy the rest needed to replenish my supplies when there is more available.

This is the very same slippery slope that you called "ridiculous" earlier. If there are 3 bags of flour, and 4 customers are heading to the store in need of one each, but each person intends to buy more than one so that they can have an extra on hand, at some point, someone is going to be left without any flour. It might be the 4th person to arrive at the store if each of the previous three was "considerate" and bought only one bag each. It might be the 3rd and 4th people to arrive at the store if one of the first person to arrive bought one bag and the other person bought two bags. It might be the 2nd, 3rd and 4th people if the first person to the store bought all 3 bags. So if you are the first person to the store, is it your mission to buy the flour that you want, or is it your mission to ensure that the most number of people possible get flour? And can you control that? If you are the first person to the store and buy 1 bag thinking that your actions are for the greater good, you have no way of knowing if the next person to arrive will buy the 2 remaining bags. In the grocery store and at WDW, your good intentions can be squashed by the next person in line. There is no solution to the example that you pose, except that each person needs to do what they feel is right for themselves secure in the knowledge that others can do the same. This is not a discussion about some strategy or technique that is only available to a select few. Anyone can avail themselves of these techniques if they find them to be so important. So no sympathy is owed to those who opt out. Besides, this is all academic. I'm not aware of anyone doing what is discussed here. Yet. And when it comes to that, it will be a miniscule minority that won't impact anyone else's fun.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

That particular nuance was not lost on me.

If you prefer, I will say it more blatantly.

If one engages in behavior such as lying about the number of people in their room to get their hands on multiple magic bands so they can buy multiple tickets in order to get more fast passes because they don't like the fact that they get 3 FP+'s with their one ticket then yes, I think that is rude, the person doing it is rude and frankly selfish.

Does it make me rude for thinking that? Perhaps.

It doesn't make you rude, it makes you a person who calls people who see things differently names for doing so, and it makes you a person who thinks that he/she is better than others who make different choices. That isn't rude behavior - it is a whole different type of inappropriate behavior.

People who do this are "selectively" compassionate. They consider the thoughts and feelings of others when it suits them. That is what I am pointing out.

 

[JimmyV]

It doesn't make you rude, it makes you a person who calls people who see things differently names for doing so, and it makes you a person who thinks that he/she is better than others who make different choices. That isn't rude behavior - it is a whole different type of inappropriate behavior.

People who do this are "selectively" compassionate. They consider the thoughts and feelings of others when it suits them. That is what I am pointing out.

This.

It isn't "rude" to buy all three bags of flour if you intend to actually use them. It would be rude to buy all three bags of flour, and then, when the next person arrives at the store hoping to buy flour, you stick out your tongue, show them your two extra bags of flour, laugh, and take a knife to them, spilling their contents on the floor.

 

[cygnusx1jg]

Quick question for Turn the Page----do you live in the LP or the UP?

 

[Turn the Page]

It doesn't make you rude, it makes you a person who calls people who see things differently names for doing so, and it makes you a person who thinks that he/she is better than others who make different choices. That isn't rude behavior - it is a whole different type of inappropriate behavior.

People who do this are "selectively" compassionate. They consider the thoughts and feelings of others when it suits them. That is what I am pointing out.

I don't think I'm better than anyone else. Just because I think certain actions and people who do them are rude for doing so doesn't mean I think I am better than anyone else. It means I disagree with their choice.

It is possible to consider the thoughts and feelings of others while still disagreeing with them, even vehemently disagreeing with them.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

I don't think I'm better than anyone else. Just because I think certain actions and people who do them are rude for doing so doesn't mean I think I am better than anyone else. It means I disagree with their choice.

The disagreement isn't the thing that makes the difference - it is the rest.

Their behavior is "rude" and your behavior is "considerate". One is clearly better in your mind.

 

[shalom]

What's the difference if you buy 3 bags of flour when there's 3 left or 3 bags of flour when there's 6 left?

I regularly "clear the shelf" when I get one of my favorite flours, because only one store in town stocks the kind I want, and there are rarely more than four there. OTOH, I also don't get to that store very often, and, although I prefer that flour, will regularly substitute if I run out. So if I didn't buy all I could when I am there, I might not end up buying so much, and considering how much I go through (I have five kids and bake frequently) it's quite possible that store might quit carrying it.

Which is to say, leaving the last bag, or taking less than you want because there doesn't seem to be enough, can actually be counterproductive in a capitalist society, because the only real reason the store has to measure demand is by what people buy.

I don't mind people getting a second room for the dining plan or more fastpasses, or whatever, because they're upping the demand for these things, which will in the long run encourage Disney to build more resorts or add on more rides, while at the same time they're lowering the crowd levels. I'm thrilled when people get two sets of park tickets per person while I'm going -- more space for me at no extra cost!

But that's partly because I am also convinced that not enough people will do it to have a serious impact on ticket prices. If everybody does it, Disney could easily start charging more for tickets. But at the prices Disney already charges, and considering the percentage of people who're rich enough to do it who're also frugal, that's just not likely to happen.

 

[glevan]

But how could the OP get two bands? Don't they have to be linked to an onsite reservation to get a band? Are they going to book a second room under a fake name? Wouldn't that be illegal?

There are multiple ways to get two tickets...for example: any person could buy and annual pass and then also buy a 10 day ticket as part of an onsite reservation. But, this is where the logistics challenge would occur. Not knowing how the IT system is setup, you might need to setup MDE with two different email accounts, with one ticket linked to only one MDE account. Again, no lying required and nothing is illegal or breaking the rules/policies (that I'm aware of). IE, I can't find anything from Disney that says a person isn't allowed to purchase two tickets and use them on the same day.

I'm not talking right/wrong, rude, etc (there's plenty of that debate going on alreardy).

I'm wondering about the actual logistics of doing this. I think it would work and be easy to managed if:
1) you had two MDE accounts
2) you had an annual pass on one account
3) you had two phones/devices with the app loaded on both (to avoid having to log in/out constantly)
4) you entered the park twice (or you used one pass and one park and then used another pass at another park)
5) you used different fingers for each pass

 

[jcemom]

Which is to say, leaving the last bag, or taking less than you want because there doesn't seem to be enough, can actually be counterproductive in a capitalist society, because the only real reason the store has to measure demand is by what people buy.

This is really OT, but I have to share anyway lol. My mom is a little Italian lady who thinks there is no such thing as having too much food. On holidays we are hard-pressed to find room on the tables/counters for all the serving dishes. When I married DH I was rather surprised to find that my MIL was the opposite. There often wasn't enough to feed everyone, IMO, especially as his siblings married and grandchildren came along. She serves a main dish, two sides, a salad, and one or two desserts, tops. Often her party-sized servings aren't much bigger than what I make for dinner for my family of five on any given weeknight.

For years we would sort of joke about it (but not to MIL). If we were going to her house we'd be sure to eat something first. Of course, there was always food left at MIL's -- one spoon of this, one slice of that. Nobody wanted to be rude and take the last little bit. We never brought it up to her, because that would have been rude.

Somehow it came up in conversation one day, fairly recently (after 25 years). It turns out, MIL thought she always made more than enough, because there were always leftovers.

 

[Laketravis]

But what if I suffer from some mental neurosis and simply purchase an additional park ticket for my invisible friend?

 

[Robo]

But what if I suffer from some mental neurosis and simply purchase an additional park ticket for my invisible friend?

As I mentioned earlier in the thread-

I understand that Elwood regularly books room reservations for Harvey.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

But what if I suffer from some mental neurosis and simply purchase an additional park ticket for my invisible friend?

What do you mean, what if?