AP sales…

[Madame]

Yes, I do understand that I quoted your post. I wasn't implying anything about you personally.

My exact reference to common sense, understanding, and grace were more general, and I still believe that to be true. If you truly cannot see a difference between the two scenarios we were addressing, then there's not much else to say. The two scenarios are completely different.

I appreciate your point of view.

I’m ESL - the manner in which you are copying my (what probably seems bizarre to you) turns of phrase seems mocking. If my English seems jarring and stilted it’s not sarcasm

 

[SL6827]

No.

Then why is there?

 

[Madame]

How about thinking of it this way - Since everyone in the family has an AP, think of the child as having one too, it just cost zero dollars. That family would have paid for the 2 year olds AP if required, no?

For the family in your example, there was a reason one person did not have an AP and it was not because of their age, which is a completly uncontrollable reason.

Really having a hard time seeing how the two are anywhere near similar situations.

But they can buy day tickets like the rest of us have to. If they are just turning 3 those families had the exact same opportunity to purchase last fall in anticipation of the child needing an AP. They didn’t.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

I don’t have an agenda. I agree with you more often than not They are doing just that. Family all have APs. Newly turned 3 year old gets approved for first time AP. This site has gotten unreal in the last year or so. I’ll refrain from pushing my agenda on you going forward

'Agenda' was a poor choice of words and I apologize for that.

 

[DonMacGregor]

So let me understand this.

The Smith Family all have AP’s. Their eldest son, Big Jimmy, is 22, is an adult, and has been away at college and hasn’t had an AP in four years. He suddenly gets his Disney MOJO back, but Disney won’t sell him a pass. If he doesn’t get a pass, he has options. He could get daily tickets, or he just goes back to not going to Disney like he has been, stays at home, whatever. He hasn’t been attending the parks, so selling him an AP (or any other ticket media) increases the park attendance (however microscopically).

The Jones Family also all have AP’s. Their youngest, Little Jimmy, just turned 4, is still riding in a stroller, may or may not be fully potty trained, and has never needed an AP because he wasn’t old enough, and Disney wouldn’t have sold him one anyway. Four years ago he was a zygote. If he doesn’t get a pass, his parents now have to buy him a daily ticket every time they go, or cancel all their other AP’s. Little Jimmy has to go where mom and dad go. Since it’s likely they’d buy a ticket every time they go anyway, and he isn’t adding to the overall park attendance (because he’s already been going every time the family goes) selling him an AP is just lines on a balance sheet.

Or they could just leave him in the car with a fan and some bottled water.

This is the inequality we’re debating?

 

[Madame]

So let me understand this.

The Smith Family all have AP’s. Their eldest son, Big Jimmy, is 22, is an adult, and has been away at college and hasn’t had an AP in four years. He suddenly gets his Disney MOJO back, but Disney won’t sell him a pass. If he doesn’t get a pass, he has options. He could get daily tickets, or he just goes back to not going to Disney like he has been, stays at home, whatever. He hasn’t been attending the parks, so selling him an AP (or any other ticket media) increases the park attendance (however microscopically).

The Jones Family also all have AP’s. Their youngest, Little Jimmy, just turned 4, is still riding in a stroller, May or may not be fully potty trained, and has never needed an AP because he wasn’t old enough, and Disney wouldn’t have sold him one anyway. Four years ago he was a zygote. If he doesn’t get a pass, his parents now have to buy him a daily ticket every time they go, or cancel all their other AP’s. Little Jimmy has to go where mom and dad go. Since it’s likely they’d buy a ticket every time they go anyway, and he isn’t adding to the overall park attendance (because he’s already been going every time the family goes) selling him an AP is just lines on a balance sheet. Or they could just leave him in the car with a fan and some bottled water.

This is the inequality we’re debating?

He is contributing to APs not going on sale for the rest of us if its true no more will be released until a number have been allowed to lapse. His parents could have bought him an AP last fall in anticipation of his birthday. They didn’t. Some of us didn’t buy thinking too that we could purchase at a later date. We should both be out of luck and have an equal opportunity to buy if sales reopen.

 

[DonMacGregor]

He is contributing to APs not going on sale for the rest of us if its true no more will be released until a number have been allowed to lapse. His parents could have bought him an AP last fall in anticipation of his birthday. They didn’t. Some of us didn’t buy thinking too that we could purchase at a later date. We should both be out of luck and have an equal opportunity to buy if sales reopen.

So I do understand it.

 

[Madame]

So I do understand it.

I guess so. I also guess you missed Carol’s post on sarcasm. I don’t need you to agree with me but if you could refrain from mocking me I’d be appreciative.

 

[Sandisw]

Let’s move the conversation on from the discussion regarding Disneys current policy that those who turn 3 can still buy a pass as long as their parents have them.

This way, we can keep this thread open!

I still think we are going to see changes at some point and that the AP of yesteryear will be no more and that whatever does come back will much more restricted with X days and the ones that are more unlimited will be so much money thst demand will be small.

My prediction..because I want it..and is an onsite only yearly pass up to X days that meets the needs of 99% of DVC and cash guests.

And that FL passes are what makes sense for those guests and the two don’t need to be the same!!

This assumes that they won’t sell new passes as they exist.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

We all know the ceiling is arbitrary anyway. Let's not lose focus here. For 30+ years, there was never a time when you couldn't buy one if you had the dead presidents to purchase it.

This is all about control, and before somebody says it, I would remind them that disney themselves have said exactly this. What is not so clear is the entirety of what exactly they are trying to control. As is usually the case, there's what we know, and everything we don't know. I suspect there's a lot more of the latter going on here than any of us know. ;-)

 

[Sandisw]

We all know the ceiling is arbitrary anyway. Let's not lose focus here. For 30+ years, there was never a time when you couldn't buy one if you had the dead presidents to purchase it.

This is all about control, and before somebody says it, I would remind them that disney themselves have said exactly this. What is not so clear is the entirety of what exactly they are trying to control. As is usually the case, there's what we know, and everything we don't know. I suspect there's a lot more of the latter going on here than any of us know. ;-)

They certainly have made it clear why they want things the way they want them, and I get it when you view it through their eyes. Now, I think they could get what they want and still give people what they need in terms of some level of AP....but, as you say, they obviously have lots going on behind the scenes that we don't know..

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

We all know the ceiling is arbitrary anyway. Let's not lose focus here. …

This is all about control, and before somebody says it, I would remind them that disney themselves have said exactly this.

I am not so sure the cap on APs distributed is all that arbitrary. I know, this limiting the number is new. But I have my suspicions that it is a calculated number.

Passholders used to be about 34% of the crowd. Disney cut attendance caps by about 17%.

There is a thread running through this that shows a paradigm shift. Passholders are now being treated as “space available” (“Space-A”) guests. Since passholders are Space-A guests, the place they made the 17% attendance cut was to sell only half the usual number of annual passes.

 

[keishashadow]

For me, as long as they are consistent in applying what ever the rule is, it’s consistent and equitable.

Inconsistent for me would be some people getting them and others not getting them with no rhyme or reason behind the decisions.

Disney fans in the know have a long standing tradition of if you don’t hear the answer you want the first time, hang up & rinse/repeat

IMO pixie dust needs not to apply in this situation. The perk needs to be distributed in accordance with whatever rules they set forth

My prediction..because I want it..and is an onsite only yearly pass up to X days that meets the needs of 99% of DVC and cash guests.

I’ve a real problem with the concept of on-site only guests being able to utilize their APs & an arbitrary number of days allotted for all members no matter how many points they own or what accommodation they book

Currently, availability is still tight for on-site rooms. Many DVC members still report being unable to find room at the inn (cash or on points).

I’ve had it happen at popular type/resort/times of year (when talking studio units) & even when we are talking 11 mo window

We visit our happy place often, working that AP. I stretch our points to make it happen via booking studios. When our points are exhausted, look to WBC or DTD hiltons. Not above revisiting the values for shorter stays, if price is reasonable.

For a trip booked ‘spur-of-the moment’ a month out earlier this year, we wound up paying $250+ APH a night for standard room. Ouch. It was the only on-site resort with availability for our dates.

My own version of blue-skying any version of upcoming passes re “X” Number of nights per year, factors in a few variables, including:

*how many points an owner has in hand, then prorating the X factor to cover booking studios in the lowest seasons

&

*Allowing for at least the addition of another few weeks booked on-site thru CRO

Do I expect it to eventually roll out that way, of course not

 

[BeachClub2014]

I’m ESL - the manner in which you are copying my (what probably seems bizarre to you) turns of phrase seems mocking. If my English seems jarring and stilted it’s not sarcasm

Not mocking you or anyone here on the DIS. I don't agree with your perspective, as you don't mine. And that's okay for both of us.

 

[Sandisw]

Disney fans in the know have a long standing tradition of if you don’t hear the answer you want the first time, hang up & rinse/repeat

IMO pixie dust needs not to apply in this situation. The perk needs to be distributed in accordance with whatever rules they set forth

I’ve a real problem with the concept of on-site only guests being able to utilize their APs & an arbitrary number of days allotted for all members no matter how many points they own or what accommodation they book

Currently, availability is still tight for on-site rooms. Many DVC members still report being unable to find room at the inn (cash or on points).

I’ve had it happen at popular type/resort/times of year (when talking studio units) & even when we are talking 11 mo window

We visit our happy place often, working that AP. I stretch our points to make it happen via booking studios. When our points are exhausted, look to WBC or DTD hiltons. Not above revisiting the values for shorter stays, if price is reasonable.

For a trip booked ‘spur-of-the moment’ a month out earlier this year, we wound up paying $250+ APH a night for standard room. Ouch. It was the only on-site resort with availability for our dates.

My own version of blue-skying any version of upcoming passes re “X” Number of nights per year, factors in a few variables, including:

*how many points an owner has in hand, then prorating the X factor to cover booking studios in the lowest seasons

&

*Allowing for at least the addition of another few weeks booked on-site thru CRO

Do I expect it to eventually roll out that way, of course not

An AP is simply a type ticket and it’s not tied to DVC. So number of points someone owns has no bearing

There really are two types of guests that go into the parks…those staying onsite…cash and DVC…and those not…locals and others staying at hotels in the area.

The current structure of the AP is a one size fits all approach…and because of that..Disney has to consider that every pass holder has the ability to visit 300 plus days.

So, part of the limit on passes is because of that structure. Coming up with a yearly pass that is tied to onsite opens up more opportunity, whether your DVC or a cash guest..to have some level of savings over multiday tickets but not as many days as a traditional AP has…which Disney doesn’t currently want any additional ones floating around.

Right now, those that don’t have one, have nothing. But, wouldn’t be nice to have something in between?

I posted early in the thread but say they came up with a yearly pass that allows 50 days in the park…forget about onsite or offsite then…for the same price as the Sorcerer, and blocked out dates for the holi days.

Instead of one person getting a pass that allows them access those 300 plus days, you can now sell six people that yearly pass, and still know it will gain only 300 admissions for that AP bucket.

Or 100 days on a pass..which gets 3 people passes instead of one.

If I am only using my Sorcerer pass, on average 25 to 30 days per year, someone else is not getting one right now because I have one that can be used so much more.

Benefit is to Disney is that they make more money. Now, I get that to charge the same for these types of passes as they do now for a regular AP will cause complaints. But it’s still less expensive than tickets which is the only option.

So, it seems like it would be great to find a product that works for FL residents and those who stay onsite better suited to each groups needs.

I certainly would rather see some type of compromise pass than have them suspended longer or indefinitely and be left with only the multi day tickets as an option for each trip.

 

[MalorieA]

Back and forth is getting very personal. If it continues, this thread will be closed.

From the posting guidelines:

"While we'd like to think that a Disney fan site is always lighthearted, there are times when there are disagreements. Let's face it, there are certain topics that can transform any of us into a raging "Donald Duck." When you sense this is happening, we ask that you step away from the discussion before it escalates into a fight. Just like Mom always said about fighting, we don't care who started the argument and we don't want it on the DIS. (Okay, she didn't say the part about the DIS, but you know what we mean.) No attacking others and no sarcasm please. Either will result in an infraction"

Yes please let’s kumbaya, people. Because this thread may be the first place you hear about APs returning. It was the first notice I got during “the glitch”

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

An AP is simply a type ticket and it’s not tied to DVC. So number of points someone owns has no bearing

There really are two types of guests that go into the parks…those staying onsite…cash and DVC…and those not…locals and others staying at hotels in the area.

The current structure of the AP is a one size fits all approach…and because of that..Disney has to consider that every pass holder has the ability to visit 300 plus days.

So, part of the limit on passes is because of that structure. Coming up with a yearly pass that is tied to onsite opens up more opportunity, whether your DVC or a cash guest..to have some level of savings over multiday tickets but not as many days as a traditional AP has…which Disney doesn’t currently want any additional ones floating around.

Right now, those that don’t have one, have nothing. But, wouldn’t be nice to have something in between?

I posted early in the thread but say they came up with a yearly pass that allows 50 days in the park…forget about onsite or offsite then…for the same price as the Sorcerer, and blocked out dates for the holi days.

Instead of one person getting a pass that allows them access those 300 plus days, you can now sell six people that yearly pass, and still know it will gain only 300 admissions for that AP bucket.

Or 100 days on a pass..which gets 3 people passes instead of one.

If I am only using my Sorcerer pass, on average 25 to 30 days per year, someone else is not getting one right now because I have one that can be used so much more.

Benefit is to Disney is that they make more money. Now, I get that to charge the same for these types of passes as they do now for a regular AP will cause complaints. But it’s still less expensive than tickets which is the only option.

So, it seems like it would be great to find a product that works for FL residents and those who stay onsite better suited to each groups needs.

I certainly would rather see some type of compromise pass than have them suspended longer or indefinitely and be left with only the multi day tickets as an option for each trip.

Nope. Nope. Nope. I do not think that will work, Sandi. Not because one size fits all,or DVC people do not deserve a pass that accommodates and pairs nicely with DVC ownership.

The reason is because if Disney said an $899 Sorcerer gets you 50 days of parkhopper entry, then ticketed customers would look at it and say a day in the park is only worth $17.98. Right now, a single day park hopper is $174.00 IIRC. Disney cannot advertise a per day price like that that is only about 10% of the per day ticket price. It would crash their ticket sales. Mega bad public relations! The beauty of annual passes is everybody knows people who buy them use very few days per year overall. Advertising 50 days might also have a strange effect of people buying them and actually trying to come 50 days “to get their money’s worth” when normally they might come 20 days. The vast majority anyway who buy annual passes maybe use around 20 days or so. The idea of 365 days is the customer chooses which unblocked-out days — not all or nearly all of the 365 days. It is a scheduling offer, not a specific quantity of days for attendance. They may have a handful of outliers who come most days, but that is pretty weird.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

An AP is simply a type ticket and it’s not tied to DVC. So number of points someone owns has no bearing

There really are two types of guests that go into the parks…those staying onsite…cash and DVC…and those not…locals and others staying at hotels in the area.

The current structure of the AP is a one size fits all approach…and because of that..Disney has to consider that every pass holder has the ability to visit 300 plus days.

So, part of the limit on passes is because of that structure. Coming up with a yearly pass that is tied to onsite opens up more opportunity, whether your DVC or a cash guest..to have some level of savings over multiday tickets but not as many days as a traditional AP has…which Disney doesn’t currently want any additional ones floating around.

Right now, those that don’t have one, have nothing. But, wouldn’t be nice to have something in between?

I posted early in the thread but say they came up with a yearly pass that allows 50 days in the park…forget about onsite or offsite then…for the same price as the Sorcerer, and blocked out dates for the holi days.

Instead of one person getting a pass that allows them access those 300 plus days, you can now sell six people that yearly pass, and still know it will gain only 300 admissions for that AP bucket.

Or 100 days on a pass..which gets 3 people passes instead of one.

If I am only using my Sorcerer pass, on average 25 to 30 days per year, someone else is not getting one right now because I have one that can be used so much more.

Benefit is to Disney is that they make more money. Now, I get that to charge the same for these types of passes as they do now for a regular AP will cause complaints. But it’s still less expensive than tickets which is the only option.

So, it seems like it would be great to find a product that works for FL residents and those who stay onsite better suited to each groups needs.

I certainly would rather see some type of compromise pass than have them suspended longer or indefinitely and be left with only the multi day tickets as an option for each trip.

No. Disney has the data and can run the algorithms.
They do not plan on an AP holder visiting 300 days.
Same logic hotels and airlines can oversell.

 

[lowlight]

No. Disney has the data and can run the algorithms.
They do not plan on an AP holder visiting 300 days.
Same logic hotels and airlines can oversell.

People always underestimate how much data companies actually have on their customers, and how they use it in predictive analytics models. Disney isn't guessing on anything. I imagine they are staying mum on AP's because the world economy is a toe hair away from imploding and they want to keep their options open for when travel inevitably slows again, and they aren't losing anything by doing so. With that said, I think they are wrong on AP's and their models can't see the collateral damage, but they get paid millions and I'm some chump on the web so we'll see who is right.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

There is zero chance that the Walt Disney Company would consider DVC owners "residents," because residents are entitled to vote. And, at least for now, the company still controls its very own public government in which those residents would reside.

But they don't need to consider DVC Members FL Residents to allow them to buy the Pixie Dust pass. They can just decide to do it. And they haven't.

Yup, they could do that regardless of residency.
But I don’t think they will. A pass with extensive blackout dates, including weekends, could drastically skew DVC booking patterns.