AP sales…

[Robbie Cottam]

We can but the fact Disney is not selling APs at the moment because of this says all you really need to know about what their legal team thinks.

ASSUME

 

[New Mouse]

ASSUME

On Disneys current quest for more money in spite of literally every single guest experience failure, they aren't gonna back off sales unless someone told them they have to.

 

[Robbie Cottam]

Ok, like I have said a few times, I will wait to see what happens…

 

[Mexacajun]

What is an email that I can send my request in to add back APs? I know it won’t matter but I want to send it anyway. I would even be for an AP that is only tied to resort stays. Just need something!

 

[Robbie Cottam]

Guest.services@disneyworld.com

 

[CarolMN]

I don't want to shut this thread down.

Some of you please take a deep breath and move on.

 

[Sandisw]

As you said, these are early days. My Pacer subscription is not active, so I cannot read Judge Carter’s April 6, 2022 order. I do not want to pay for it just to answer someone who is … well anyway. That is futile. So let’s refocus to see if we can observe some palpable recent change in Disney’s handling of park reservations for passholders since April 6th. I know I did see a change towards prioritizing passholder access starting November 24th. I know conduct of a defendant correcting tortious acts cannot be admitted in evidence to prove the tort, but we are not in court. It may help us see which way they are going now.

I am kind of conflicted by this case and the manipulation of reservations to throttle passholders. I want Disney to be ok because I love Disney World etc like everybody else. But using reservations to surreptitiously define availability and throttle passholders is quite another thing. I would vote to drop the reservation system and move on, but I guess I do not get a vote. Is there any place where we can be noisy enough that Disney might hear us and consider doing that?

Or, if they want to keep the reservation system intact, be sure to simply add more spots when both buckets fill up? The only thing I know is that it would be nice to see things back soon for those that need and want them!!!

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

.

 

[Isamar]

You can see the filings in the lawsuit at this link:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docke...d_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

All filings are listed but only some can be opened (you’d have to pay to get the others).

The judge’s reasons & decision on Disney’s motion to dismiss the claims is at document #35. As some have already noted here, he denied the motion on some claims (ie. did not dismiss the plaintiff’s claims) and allowed the motion on others (ie. he dismissed some claims).

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

.

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

Oh. The website for new passes is back online and nothing changed. . Oh well.

I’m 4 days away from being able to renew at current prices….

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

.

 

[Sandisw]

Ok. I will just say this, but I am not going into it further or go back and forth explaining to anyone. The Judge denied the motion to dismiss the breach of contract claim and some others. (Some claims were dismissed because Plaintiff agreed to dismiss them, but nothing significant to this post. Some were dismissed with the right to redraft the claim and file it again — subject to a future motion for dismissal. Also not discussed in this post.). The claims that were the heart of the lawsuit, as I see it, survived the motion to dismiss.

One of the o surviving claims was the breach of contract. The issue is whether the term “unavailable” is ambiguous (basically same as or different from park capacity). The issue of whether an ambiguity exists for the purpose of a dismissal motion is a question of law; which means the Judge decides it at that point. Judge Carter decided there is an ambiguity.

Then, in the trial, the issue of whether there is an ambiguity that results in breach of contract or misleading advertising or whatever becomes a question of fact for a jury to decide. So, if a later jury also decides there is an ambiguity, then the rule of law is the ambiguity is construed against the drafter; Disney.

In this case, Disney wrote the contract so an ambiguity would be against Disney when interpreting contract language: 1. Unavailability is NOT like capacity — cannot use reservations to block passholders if capacity is not met and there is availability for ticket holders, or 2. Unavailability just means unavailable whether for park capacity or for any reason, even one Disney solely controls. Disney is arguing the second position and the Judge wrote Disney had not provided a positive definition on that point so there was ambiguity for purposes of the dismissal motion.

Whether Disney can make a positive definition distinction can later would go to the issue whether there are facts upon which a jury could decide in favor of Disney. ( A jury has to find facts first to support their decision.).

Plaintiff has until close of business on May 6th to rewrite and refile the claims that were dismissed without prejudice.

That is the nutshell version as I see it. I think Judge Carter did a really good job of winnowing the filed claims to the viable claims and relevant issues at this stage. Early days still.

I just read it and I agree that two of the main issues were allowed to continue. It is pretty simple. Sell APs and tickets...set a number to start and adjust as you go along, but in all cases, tickets and AP holders are either all blocked, or all eligible to try for the ones left.

The problem I see at this point is whether Disney can change things up in the language of the ticket (if they want control) without it being seen as an admission that wording was indeed not clear.

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

.

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

,

 

[Sandisw]

Great! Another magical year for you. I assume you will renew?

I am watching daily because I want to upgrade. Cannot yet. I used to have Platinum plus. Then we moved far away and I dropped it. Then we moved back and I got Pixie, but I want Incredi-Pass. If they start sales I will go in person to Disney Springs and upgrade or just buy Incredi-Pass (or top tier) and abandon Pixie. Disney might change prices and terms and conditions. I really enjoyed holidays in the parks and now I would have to buy tickets.

That raises a question. I know if I have not activated Pixie I can upgrade online. If I have activated I have to call or do it in person and my upgraded pass will have the same start date as the activation date on my Pixie. I can add photos or water parks with the same retro to activation date. That much I learned from the CM on the Passholder line. But I forgot to ask; if my MDE shows I have a pass, will it allow me to buy two more new annual (Incredi-Passes) for DH (linked) when they go on sale as new annual passes ti the public? In other words, I would just abandon the remainder of the Pixie passes. But if I am blocked from buying two new passes before my renewal window because I already have passes assigned to a specific person, then that is a problem for me.

In the past, you could buy new vouchers no matter what else you had. So, assuming rules don't change, you can buy you and DH an Incredi-pass voucher regardless of what you have for the Pixie Pass.

Now, those vouchers must be activated in a year's time...that was a change in 2021 from year's prior...

What they won't allow you to do is keep both as top pass...so they will simply rearrange the Incredi pass to be used first and let the other one just expire....well, that is how it should work....

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

The problem I see at this point is whether Disney can change things up in the language of the ticket (if they want control) without it being seen as an admission that wording was indeed not clear.

I think they're really in a bind here. I think the only real options they have are:
1. Get rid of the reservation system for everyone;
2. Get rid of different buckets for different classes (ap holders versus day ticket holders), and put everyone on an equal footing; or
3. Vastly change the Annual Passes so that they're not really annual passes as we know them anymore, and it's clear that they are not annual passes.

Any middle ground where they try to sell what they purport to be "annual passes," and then loophole their way into blocking AP holders on days when they want to sell more day passes are going to land them exactly where they are now. As was indicated earlier in this thread, you can't sell a ferrari and then hide in the fine print that It's actually a dodge that you're just calling a ferrari.

Great! Another magical year for you. I assume you will renew?

Yes, definitely. I wouldn't want to risk being shut out. I'm worried about losing the opportunity to renew into the current pass structure sometime in the next four days, it's nail-biting

 

[Sandisw]

I think they're really in a bind here. I think the only real options they have are:
1. Get rid of the reservation system for everyone;
2. Get rid of different buckets for different classes (ap holders versus day ticket holders), and put everyone on an equal footing; or
3. Vastly change the Annual Passes so that they're not really annual passes as we know them anymore, and it's clear that they are not annual passes.

Any middle ground where they try to sell what they purport to be "annual passes," and then loophole their way into blocking AP holders on days when they want to sell more day passes are going to land them exactly where they are now. As was indicated earlier in this thread, you can't sell a ferrari and then hide in the fine print that It's actually a dodge that you're just calling a ferrari.


Yes, definitely. I wouldn't want to risk being shut out. I'm worried about losing the opportunity to renew into the current pass structure sometime in the next four days, it's nail-biting

As I mentioned, they could keep it all the same except adjusting the buckets behind the scenes so that if the AP bucket is close to full but tickets bucket is not, adjust.

I get the different buckets and I think it’s okay to keep them so each type of ticket holder has spots without the other taking majority.

But, since Disney controls those, they have the power yo adjust and combine when things get down to a level suggesting capacity limits will be reached.

For all we know, they are doing it now and it’s been posted it very well may be.

I do agree we may be in for some different type of ticket that is not called an AP but allows X admissions within the year.