concierge deck on Dream

[BethA]

I was specifically told only those booked in the room can use the lounge and sun deck. My parents often travel with us, but not always in our room. In the past they keyed a room card so they could get in. Now i would have to go get them. I totally understand because for the number of people the lounge area is not that large.

 

[BibbidyBobbidyBoo]

This is what Im talking about. Only 2 people paid for the concierge perk of booking excursions early, and only 2 should have been allowed.

Although all passengers are immediate family and booking another non concierge room with 3 others was less expensive than booking all 5 into a concierge room, it should still limit the benefits to only those who paid the premium of a concierge cabin. If they could not book the same time as your excursion at their online booking time then you should have rebooked your excursion to the time the others in the non concierge cabin were able to obtain.

If you are concerned that there may not be enough slots available at their booking time, then the premium should have been paid to allow everyone to book early.

Last sentence- should? Hmm, DCL felt differently. I go by their rules rather than what someone else thinks I "should" do or not do. had they told me it was impossible and I'd have to wait- I'd have waited. But instead they were oh yes no problem at all!
(and btw- that part wouldn't make a difference anyway because we later found out that booking early or not- we could easily still book anything we wanted for them once on the ship at the first reception anyway. apparently they reserve stuff like that for concierge guests and do so with enough slots for them to include their immediate family which they've also booked in another room, assuming a family of 5 would want to do excusions together I suppose. I cannot say if they would do that for those just booked on the same cruise as extended family and friends though)

As for the issue of sundeck and lounge, I'm willing to guess that most likely Dream/Fantasy won't have an issue with if the key is switched over from child to adult because adult had to be booked in the other room "on paper" but won't actually sleep that way- they won't have an issue with that. It's still paying for 2 people, 2 people using the concierge areas. I bet they won't care at all- same as they don't care (now on Magic/Wonder) if you switch everyone around where they are actually sleeping and give you keys for such. and especially considering how they've handled concierge up till now. They might not continue allowing the entire family- but I'd be willing to bet they won't mind a parent switching out with child who has their name on the room but isn't actually using the room... as long as the same amount of people booked concierge is the same amount of people using it. And personally- if 2ppl are paid for and only 2ppl are using it, I fail to see why anyone else would care if it was my son or me.. one or the other. It makes no difference to anyone else WHO the 2 ppl are. Would you prefer my son in the lounge and sundeck than myself? I doubt it.. 13yr old boy vs. adult woman.. hmmm no brainer IMO *shrugs*

 

[Billinaz]

Its OK, I get it.

You tried to get something you didnt pay for and got it.

3 out of your party got a benefit of booking excursions early without paying for it.

 

[BibbidyBobbidyBoo]

Hmm, actually it was more like Disney allowed it and I let them allow it. They could have easily said no, but they didn't. So your beef should be with them, not me. *shrugs* It was the first time we'd booked concierge (except at port which negates the benefit of early booking. HEY, does the fact I had concierge without benefit of early booking of excursions allow me forgiveness for accepting that benefit for our children who weren't in a concierge room at a later cruise? It should! ) and as in the past we'd always been able to book them all at the same time- I simply wrote them asking when we'd be able to book all 5 because I didn't want to book excursions for just two of us and then be unable to book it for the other 3 of us later on. That is exactly how I asked... they could have easily replied such and such date (date of the nonconcierge room could book) would be when we could book them all.

They didn't.
Instead they surprised me by saying we'll take care of it all for you right now, what excursions do you want and it will be booked and we'll send you a confirmation email.

So.. wrong. I didn't "try" to get something I didn't pay for. It was offered to me. Period

(and even if they hadn't- once onboard I could have easily booked those excursions for all 5 of us. This is how Disney does things.. have a problem with it? Take that up with them instead of trying to lay a guilt trip on me)

Did you know that those in concierge rooms have other perks as well- such as booking large groups in Palo when not all those in the group (nay I say probably almost all of them not) are not concierge? again, a perk that disney allows... so no one else should get upset with those that use that perk and instead if they have a beef- take it up with Disney.

 

[Billinaz]

About booking early online- we had issues with only the 2ppl in the concierge room able to book early and the other room not...- online. One email to concierge and they immediately took care of booking the other 3 in our family for the same excursions. Again, this is immediate family- not extended family staying in other rooms so I can only speak about our immediate family (and both rooms booked/paid for by US.... not other relatives or friends or something of that nature)

Here is where I derived your asking for the other 3 in your party who did not pay for concierge perks, yet partook of them after your request.

The way I read it was that you realized only 2 who paid for the benefit of booking online early were able to do so and that prompted you to contact DCL and ask for the same benefit for the 3 who did nto pay for that benefit.

I wasnt trying to defer any blame to DCL because they allowed it, only that your request (as I read from the above) for the benefit was granted.

I guess if enough people send the CEO comments on tightening up the concierge perks they would do that too.

But then those individuals with a sense of entitlement would complain to them as well.

You can never win. If you stick to the letter of the law people are mad. If you bend the rules people get mad. I guess the choice is figure out who you want mad at you!

 

[actuarian]

On the Magic and the Wonder, the Cat. 4 rooms that are next to the Concierge suites are not concierge so there was a need to make some special provisions for families that booked both the suite and the adjoining room. On the Dream/Fantasy, the room that is next to a suite is a Cat. V Concierge Family Stateroom so there is no longer a need to make those exceptions. Any family that is too large for a single suite can book the suite and the adjoining Cat. V stateroom and all will have concierge privileges. This means that a family that books both a concierge room and a non-concierge room would seem to be trying to get the perks without paying for them. Allowing that would not be fair to the people who do pay for two adjoining rooms in the concierge section. Why should a family who pays for one Cat. V room and one lower category room expect to get the same privileges as a family who pays more for two Cat. V rooms???

 

[kaseyC]

On the Magic and the Wonder, the Cat. 4 rooms that are next to the Concierge suites are not concierge so there was a need to make some special provisions for families that booked both the suite and the adjoining room. On the Dream/Fantasy, the room that is next to a suite is a Cat. V Concierge Family Stateroom so there is n longer a need to make those exceptions. Any family that is too large for a single suite can book the suite and the adjoining Cat. V stateroom and all will have concierge privileges. This means that a family that books both a concierge room and a non-concierge room would seem to be trying to get the perks without paying for them. Allowing that would not be fair to the people who do pay for two adjoining rooms in the concierge section. Why should a family who pays for one Cat. V room and one lower category room expect to get the same privileges as a family who pays more for two Cat. V rooms???

I think on the Dream at least, the days of providing concierge perks to those not in concierge rooms are gone. I noticed on my documents I received yesterday for my upcoming cruise, there was a specific section under vacation summary : Concierge Guests On Your Reservation... with the names and CC level of each person in our cabin. I don't remember seeing that on our past concierge bookings on the Magic and Wonder... maybe I missed it. To me it seems to suggest that the concierge team will be working off a master list of paying concierge guests. Our luggage tags also had the special concierge "crossed Mickey Keys" symbol.

It will be interesting to see how things play out for families used to booking one concierge room and one non concierge room, DCL isn't well know for enforcing their own rules.

 

[andersonfamily]

It sounds like we all understand that Disney's official policy is that only those booked in concierge have access to concierge services - just like it was for the magic and wonder. What we don't know yet is what Disney's practice and procedure will be for enforcing their policy. That practice may be something that evolves over time and may differ from Dream/Fantasy to Magic/Wonder based on the effect on the other passengers.

For instance - in Magic/Wonder, making a practice of extending concierge benefits like free arcade cards, doesn't impact any other passanger and 99% of the other passangers would have no idea that the benefits are being extended. It's not like they only had 25 cards and giving them to other rooms associated with concierge reservations took something from those who were booked in concierge. Contrast that with Dream/Fantasy, where allowing others to enter the lounge could take away room or a chair or whatever from those that had paid for it. If I can't get a chair for my kids or we're out of drinks in the lounge because someone else has 5 more people in the lounge (that weren't booked in concierge and Disney's not planned space or food for them) then I didn't get what I paid for, I complain, I get something refunded or free in the future and that hurts Disney. That's why I think the practice of how Disney enforces its policy of only concierge guests in the lounge will evolve based on how people act.

As for Disney's policy that no one under 18 travels alone and that there is sufficient adult supervision of minors, which they enforce through the practice making the reservations book one adult per room and then allowing a rearrangement of the reservations at check in - that doesn't affect anyone else (unless there are a bunch of wild children all night in a room or something). Even if Disney let you rearrange to move all three of the people booked in the lower room into concierge as long as it's not over capacity or over what the ship is stocked for - that's Disney losing money on letting you skirt the system not me. The issue will be, with the new amenities offered by the Dream/ Fantasy, that Disney cannot continue the same practice it had with the Magic/Wonder. They will have to design new practices to make sure that the people that paid for conceirge get what they paid for, and they may design new practices to make sure that Disney doesn't extend any benefits to those who haven't paid for them. We'll have to wait and see whether every 3 year old that walks in the lounge with their parent has to show their own "gold" car or if its like the shorts and adult pool issues that aren't enforced until someone else is impacted and complains.

 

[dursin]

Last sentence- should? Hmm, DCL felt differently. I go by their rules rather than what someone else thinks I "should" do or not do. had they told me it was impossible and I'd have to wait- I'd have waited. But instead they were oh yes no problem at all!
(and btw- that part wouldn't make a difference anyway because we later found out that booking early or not- we could easily still book anything we wanted for them once on the ship at the first reception anyway. apparently they reserve stuff like that for concierge guests and do so with enough slots for them to include their immediate family which they've also booked in another room, assuming a family of 5 would want to do excusions together I suppose. I cannot say if they would do that for those just booked on the same cruise as extended family and friends though)

As for the issue of sundeck and lounge, I'm willing to guess that most likely Dream/Fantasy won't have an issue with if the key is switched over from child to adult because adult had to be booked in the other room "on paper" but won't actually sleep that way- they won't have an issue with that. It's still paying for 2 people, 2 people using the concierge areas. I bet they won't care at all- same as they don't care (now on Magic/Wonder) if you switch everyone around where they are actually sleeping and give you keys for such. and especially considering how they've handled concierge up till now. They might not continue allowing the entire family- but I'd be willing to bet they won't mind a parent switching out with child who has their name on the room but isn't actually using the room... as long as the same amount of people booked concierge is the same amount of people using it. And personally- if 2ppl are paid for and only 2ppl are using it, I fail to see why anyone else would care if it was my son or me.. one or the other. It makes no difference to anyone else WHO the 2 ppl are. Would you prefer my son in the lounge and sundeck than myself? I doubt it.. 13yr old boy vs. adult woman.. hmmm no brainer IMO *shrugs*

Agree 100%. If you paid the concierge rate for 2 people in the concierge room, it should not matter at all if you swap a parent for a child. You paid for concierge for 2 and you'll be using concierge benefits for 2. Not a problem at all.

 

[drparoo]

On the Magic and the Wonder, the Cat. 4 rooms that are next to the Concierge suites are not concierge so there was a need to make some special provisions for families that booked both the suite and the adjoining room. On the Dream/Fantasy, the room that is next to a suite is a Cat. V Concierge Family Stateroom so there is n longer a need to make those exceptions. Any family that is too large for a single suite can book the suite and the adjoining Cat. V stateroom and all will have concierge privileges. This means that a family that books both a concierge room and a non-concierge room would seem to be trying to get the perks without paying for them. Allowing that would not be fair to the people who do pay for two adjoining rooms in the concierge section. Why should a family who pays for one Cat. V room and one lower category room expect to get the same privileges as a family who pays more for two Cat. V rooms???

Exactly. This will be our situation this year on the Wonder. If they had an option to ADD concierge to my connecting Cat 4 room for extra, I would, but I can't. I'm grateful that they've told me that my son will be able to join us in all of the concierge services.

 

[bigedwin]

Just my impression that what is missing form this picture is why would disney BEND the rules?
Simple Disney is a Customer service Driven company.
They are not Military or goverment. They have guidelines and also have leadway to enforce the guidelines.
They empower their employees to benefit the customers.
Most of this issues noted here are EXTREMES.
On an every day basis minor issues like having kids in non concierge cabins would not impact the general experience of other Concierge cruisers.
Minor issues like allowing the kids to join their parents on an excursion reservation are non issues.
We are lucky that the ones making the choices and assesments of the real situations at hand are well trained Disney Employees. They have a Visison of how to dish out Great customer service.
Im Glad SOme of the posters on this boards are not in charge of managing the Concierge area, such inflexibility would be extremely negative.
Disney always prides itself when they can offer something extra something that is not nessesarily measured but certainly will please their customers.

Some of the People that are so Negative and so Angry here can be summed up by this statements.
"Missery Loves company"

Instead Disney Lives By the following:
" Live and Let live"

My 2 cents...........

 

[ppony]

OH that was a neat video! thanks for posting! (I haven't read beyond page 1 sorry)
As others have said, I dearly hope they enforce no non-c guests allowed because whoa, that lounge looks um, cozy?! I'm phobic about groups of people close together. Can you envision that place at oh, breakfast time???? If it's anything like the resort lounges anyway. Yikes!

 

[Ted C]

So I have to ask the question, why in the heck does anybody care? You go on a cruise to enjoy yourself. It doesn't matter folks. I've been concierge level on almost every Disney cruise I've ever taken. I could care less if someone joins in with their family/friends. It doesn't/hasn't affected my cruise whatsoever. I don't sit around wondering if this or that person paid for concierge level. I suppose if it got to the point where it did detract from my experience, or my needs, then I might say something but it never has and probably never will. It seems the only ones complaining in this thread are the ones who can't afford, or don't chose to, pay for this service. The reason there are gates is not because of the people who paid for concierge, it's for the ones who didn't pay for it trying to go where they're not supposed to go. How can you sit around and let this stuff consume you???

 

[KingRichard]

Well I guess it would be like someone paying for the salad bar but then eats the whole buffet because everyone else at the table PAID for the buffet?

Some may consider that stealing?

 

[Ted C]

Yes it would be but it's not the same. We're not talking about food or other tangible goods here that are special to concierge. It's a cruise ship and everything is pretty much included in the price. Concierge really doesn't provide anything that everybody else couldn't get on the normal cruise fare. There are no special buffets or different foods, or free drinks (beyond the one party), nor anything else of special value, that wouldn't constitute the word "stealing". They simply provide you with the same things everyone else gets in a more expeditious fashion. You may be the first ones off the ship on an excursion but heck everyone is going to the same place anyway

The reason we do concierge level is for the bigger room. It's worth it to us since we usually have five. The percs are nice but they're really not anything different from what you get as a non concierge guest. Sure you can book Palo ahead of time but have ever not gotten a Palo reservation once you got on the ship?? They hold a bunch back for that very reason. I don't ever remember reading on here someone didn't get to eat at Palo that really wanted to. Disney's job is to try to make everyone happy and they do a pretty good job of it.

Really it's a great revenue center for them, one I wouldn't be investing in if the room size didn't justify it. Taking people to the the concierge lounge or deck is a different story due their sizes. We'll see how the CM's deal with this in the coming months... This should be obeyed and enforced due to size limitations.

 

[andersonfamily]

Yes it would be but it's not the same. We're not talking about food or other tangible goods here. It's a cruise ship and everything is pretty much included in the price. Concierge really doesn't provide anything that everybody else couldn't get on the normal cruise fare. There are no special buffets or different foods, or free drinks (beyond the one party), nor anything else of special value, that wouldn't constitute the word "stealing". They simply provide you with the same things everyone else gets. You may be the first ones off the ship on an excursion but heck everyone is going to the same place anyway

The reason we do concierge level is for the bigger room. It's worth it to us since we usually have five. The percs are nice but they're really not anything different from what you get as a non concierge guest. Sure you can book Palo ahead of time but have ever not gotten a Palo reservation once you got on the ship?? They hold a bunch back for that very reason. I don't ever remember reading on here someone didn't get to eat at Palo that really wanted to. Disney's job is to try to make everyone happy and they do a pretty good job of it.

I am sure people on this thread were speaking of the new Dream ship. There are many additional tangible goods and services compared to the Magic and Wonder.

 

[dursin]

Well I guess it would be like someone paying for the salad bar but then eats the whole buffet because everyone else at the table PAID for the buffet?

Some may consider that stealing?

If the buffet was replenished fast enough so it didn't impact me, who cares. Same if a non-concierge guest comes into the lounge and grabs a snack. Unless it was the last one, I wouldn't let it get to me. That's DCL's concern, not mine.

 

[thechief]

You are kidding right?
So if I had an indoor stateroom and you had a verandah it wouldn't be a problem if I used your verandah?

 

[dursin]

You are kidding right?
So if I had an indoor stateroom and you had a verandah it wouldn't be a problem if I used your verandah?

Your verandah analogy is silly...not going to bother with it.

We can use the concierge deck as an example though. If there's a dozen free chairs out there and someone in concierge brought in a non-concierge guest who occupied one of those dozen open lounge chairs, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest as it wouldn't remove any of the benefits I was entitled too.

 

[thechief]

OK. Let's understand something.
They didn't pay for the use of the Concierge Deck. Period. I did or you did. So it doesn't matter?
How about this analogy?
You pay to eat at Palo. There are open tables. So someone comes in and eats without paying the extra charge. Is that also OK with you?