DAS changes coming WDW May 20/ DL June 18, 2024

[AnnaKristoff2013]

So, if those numbers are correct, I am not really seeing the DAS abuse. Or maybe I am just reading it wrong. Did that factor in DAS guests bringing additional people with them into the line?

I don't know that Testa was using his numbers to claim abuse. I think he was just posting to show how much of the LL capacity was going to G+ versus everything else, and the number to G+ was sort of surprisingly small.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

Also, they were assuming that if 8 people walked up at the same time and the 1st person was a DAS user, that all 8 people were in the same party, I've used DAS and had ILL or G+ users directly behind me, it doesn't mean they were in my party but one could assume they were since they scanned directly after me (if I was a group of 5, that means they theoretically making my group 160% of what it actually is). The whole concept of LT studying the blue light and guests afterwards is entirely skewed based on the concept I provided. The only correct data would be from Disney directly only.

He wasn't counting DAS users, he was counting LL users in total. He was not looking at what colors the tap points were changing.

 

[SueM in MN]

Re how were the numbers of DAS users were calculated - len testa talks about it in detail here (mods, I hope this is OK - it's not showing up as a blocked site for me)

https://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/is-attendance-really-down-at-wdw-this-or….981083/page-259#post-10727507

Disney has decided they need to make changes to DAS. We don't know exactly what data they based this on and it doesn't really matter. Only Disney knows what information they have, They have a right to make changes.
Some of the things that are generally accepted as true include:

• People have posted on information on TikTok and other public sources telling how to falsely obtain DAS and maximize use of DAS
• Some people registered for DAS are selling access to their Friends & Family slots linked to their DAS (acting as tour guides)

I read that post and since people are quoting his numbers as absolute truth, I think it's good/fair to question how he came up with them.

There has been a lot of discussion on this thread, with a lot of people accepting everything he has written as 'Proof'. I am pointing out some things here and don't think this 'proof' should be discussed here anymore.
ONLY DISNEY KNOWS THE ACTUAL NUMBER, anything else is a guess.

He had people watching everyone who entered a particular attraction at a particular 1 hour time of day on 9/13/2023. His people were just counting numbers entering the Standby and LL entrance. Those may or may not reflect what goes on other times, especially for guests using DAS.

He's making a lot of assumptions to come up with his figures. His assumptions included:

• Observations made reflected what would be seen other times of day (his observations were made between 5 and 9pm).
• That his observations were correct (for example, Haunted Mansion between 5 and 6pm, they reported counting 710 entering the Standby line and 923 in the LL).
• The small number of guests on VIP tours during the observation times reflected VIP tour use. I've personally seen 2 or 3 groups of VIP tours getting on an attraction during the few minutes I'm getting on an attraction during the day on some days. I personally would expect more VIP tours during the day and fewer in the evening.
• attractions have a maximum capacity of 300 per hour for Genie+ allocation, which is a static number. He admits that number should be taken with a grain of salt. He/we don't know whether ALL attractions have the same Genie+ allocation per hour AND/OR whether the allocation per hour is the same for all hours of the day.
• Genie+ has a 1 hour return time, so the guest using LL during his count included only the 300 Genie+ allocated for that hour. Guests frequently post that they were able to use Genie+ 5 minutes before and 15 minutes after their 1 hour window. The 'unknowable' part is how many in his count included people using that 'expanded window'
• There is no way to count Rider Swap (which he conceded) or people using LL with Guest Recovery Passes (for example, if Space Mountain had been down for a while, guests who had Genie+ while the ride was down might have gotten a Guest Recovery Pass allowing entry into another attraction).

He's extrapolating all that to come up with his numbers. A few numbers/assumptions being different would make a big difference in the end result.
Some other confounding factors include:

• guests with a DAS Return Time have a beginning time to use it, but it can be used any time after that until the attraction or park closes. So, people using DAS during the one hour observation period could have received that Return Time many hours before.
• guests with disabilities don't use all attractions equally. Many have disabilities that make attractions like Space Mountain or 7 Dwarfs inappropriate for them.

 

[TwoMisfits]

The reason they don't want folks to swap out their own DAS parties is probably b/c limit 4 in future Disney DAS does NOT mean "guarantee 4" if you get the DAS. I could completely see some adult solos getting "DAS LIMIT 1" as their option since they can travel solo, so they wouldn't need guests to accompany them...so all the DAS extra numbers would do is enable a non-immediate-family able bodied person to avoid lines for free...and this is the area Disney seems to be cracking down on the most.

 

[lanejudy]

rather than legal definition (as was talked about a lot earlier on) when it stated immediate family

That early discussion really was focused on a "legal definition" which I don't think exists in the broad sense that people were trying to apply it. The phrase "immediate family" has varied "legal definitions" depending on the situation. Insurance, HR benefits departments, financial, government benefits, etc. but each defines that phrase for their own purposes -- and that definition as spelled out by that entity for that specific purpose becomes "legal definition." It doesn't mean it can be extended to any other company for any other purpose, without that new business officially defining it.

By removing that wording from the website, it would appear Disney has decided not to officially define "immediate family" but will likely work with individuals on a case-by-case basis. Which many posters were saying from the start.

Current processes actually allow more than 6 to be linked to a person's DAS, but no more than 6 can be selected for a given Return Time. Substitute "4" for "6" in that sentence, and I suspect that is how it will be handled going forward. Of course we don't know for certain until the change takes effect, but I do not think Disney is out to severely limit the experience of their park guests. They want happy guests, but need to find the balance. A simple change from 6 to 4, but handled pretty much as it is currently, would do that; with exceptions managed on a case-by-case basis.

 

[jlundeen]

Disney has decided they need to make changes to DAS. We don't know exactly what data they based this on and it doesn't really matter. Only Disney knows what information they have, They have a right to make changes.
Some of the things that are generally accepted as true include:

• People have posted on information on TikTok and other public sources telling how to falsely obtain DAS and maximize use of DAS
• Some people registered for DAS are selling access to their Friends & Family slots linked to their DAS (acting as tour guides)

I read that post and since people are quoting his numbers as absolute truth, I think it's good/fair to question how he came up with them.
He had people watching everyone who entered a particular attraction at a particular 1 hour time of day on 9/13/2023. Those may or may not reflect what goes on other times, especially for guests using DAS.

He's making a lot of assumptions to come up with his figures. His assumptions included:

• Observations made reflected what would be seen other times of day (his observations were made between 5 and 9pm).
• The small number of guests on VIP tours during the observation times reflected VIP tour use. I've personally seen 2 or 3 groups of VIP tours getting on an attraction during the few minutes I'm getting on an attraction during the day on some days. I personally would expect more VIP tours during the day and fewer in the evening.
• attractions have a maximum capacity of 300 per hour for Genie+ allocation, which is a static number. He admits that number should be taken with a grain of salt. He/we don't know whether ALL attractions have the same Genie+ allocation per hour AND/OR whether the allocation per hour is the same for all hours of the day.
• Genie+ has a 1 hour return time, so the guest using LL during his count included only the 300 Genie+ allocated for that hour. Guests frequently post that they were able to use Genie+ 5 minutes before and 15 minutes after their 1 hour window. The 'unknowable' part is how many in his count included people using that 'expanded window'
• There is no way to count Rider Swap (which he conceded) or people using LL with Guest Recovery Passes (for example, if Space Mountain had been down for a while, guests who had Genie+ while the ride was down might have gotten a Guest Recovery Pass allowing entry into another attraction).

He's extrapolating all that to come up with his numbers. A few numbers/assumptions being different would make a big difference in the end result.
Some other confounding factors include:

• guests with a DAS Return Time have a beginning time to use it, but it can be used any time after that until the attraction or park closes. So, people using DAS during the one hour observation period could have received that Return Time many hours before.
• guests with disabilities don't use all attractions equally. Many have disabilities that make attractions like Space Mountain or 7 Dwarfs inappropriate for them.

Thank you for posting this. In my mind, it's not that he has posted their numbers - to me, ( and I agree with a previous poster), it's what some folks take away from his findings. On so many other social media areas, they take this and twist it into "See.... I told you DAS is corrupt!" It's the negetivity that is spread about "how much abuse DAS is happening."

I'm glad that Disney is tightening restrictions and making it more individualized to the guests that need accommodations, and not so much a one size fits all kind of thing. I just hope that over time, it doesn't evolve into an unsustainable effort so that enforcement becomes unweildy. If that happens, I fear the guests with true needs, as well as the CMs, will be affected, and opens the possibility of even more abuse.

Time will tell, I guess.

 

[Angel Ariel]

@SueM in MN and @lanejudy - my apologies for the rabbit hole my post started. My intent was to stop one from forming with all the speculation that was being posted about where the numbers came from, but that's not what happened. I'm happy to delete the post.

I also want to be clear both for the mods and anyone else - it was not my intent to provide that as proof of these numbers are absolute truth in any way. I have my own concerns, which I didn't share because I wasn't intending to go down the rabbit hole.

Again, my apologies.

 

[SueM in MN]

That early discussion really was focused on a "legal definition" which I don't think exists in the broad sense that people were trying to apply it. The phrase "immediate family" has varied "legal definitions" depending on the situation. Insurance, HR benefits departments, financial, government benefits, etc. but each defines that phrase for their own purposes -- and that definition as spelled out by that entity for that specific purpose becomes "legal definition." It doesn't mean it can be extended to any other company for any other purpose, without that new business officially defining it.

By removing that wording from the website, it would appear Disney has decided not to officially define "immediate family" but will likely work with individuals on a case-by-case basis. Which many posters were saying from the start.

Current processes actually allow more than 6 to be linked to a person's DAS, but no more than 6 can be selected for a given Return Time. Substitute "4" for "6" in that sentence, and I suspect that is how it will be handled going forward. Of course we don't know for certain until the change takes effect, but I do not think Disney is out to severely limit the experience of their park guests. They want happy guests, but need to find the balance. A simple change from 6 to 4, but handled pretty much as it is currently, would do that; with exceptions managed on a case-by-case basis.

I agree totally.

A lot of the grief after the initial announcement saying 'immediate family' was due to people looking at it as a legal definition and freaking out because their own family did not fit whatever legal definition of 'immediate family' was used.
I don't personally think Disney ever meant it to be a legalistic definition. I think the main reason was to address 'influencers' and other people using DAS for business (like selling their DAS Family & Friends 'slots' as tour guides).
I think 'Family' was more to address guests who were claiming they needed 8-12 people linked to their DAS because they are all 'family, on a family trip.' I think the definition of family and will be fluid based on the situation, the way it's always been. The number will probably also be somewhat fluid for family on an individual basis, as it has always been.

 

[PrincessV]

Current processes actually allow more than 6 to be linked to a person's DAS, but no more than 6 can be selected for a given Return Time.

I never knew this! I only have a total of 6 people in my F&F, but every time I’ve either renewed my DAS or added one of those 6 to my DAS party, the CM has deleted everyone who was previously in my DAS party and started over - so my assumption was that only those who happened to be visiting with me that day were allowed to be added, and each time I visited after that with a different party makeup (which has never been more than a total of 4 at a time, usually only 2-3), I’ve had to visit GS to change out who’s in my DAS party. Last week, I entered the park with a previous DAS group of myself plus Guests A, B, and C, but when I asked to add Guest D, they changed my DAS party to only Guests A and D.

Not once has a CM said they could all remain in my approved DAS party and I’d just select the one/s riding with me at any given time! It adds to the confusion and frustration that even in the Before Times we weren’t all getting the same info from Disney.

 

[SueM in MN]

@SueM in MN and @lanejudy - my apologies for the rabbit hole my post started. My intent was to stop one from forming with all the speculation that was being posted about where the numbers came from, but that's not what happened. I'm happy to delete the post.

I also want to be clear both for the mods and anyone else - it was not my intent to provide that as proof of these numbers are absolute truth in any way. I have my own concerns, which I didn't share because I wasn't intending to go down the rabbit hole.

Again, my apologies.

You can leave it.
I think the 2 main issues with his numbers and the inside info he says he has is that most people don't question or look at it critically. It's been taken as 'totally accurate gospel' by a lot of people. As another poster mentioned earlier, there is a lot of fuzzy math going on in

And it's been used to vilify DAS users and lump everyone using DAS with the people who are misusing or abusing it.

 

[Angel Ariel]

You can leave it.
I think the 2 main issues with his numbers and the inside info he says he has is that most people don't question or look at it critically. It's been taken as 'totally accurate gospel' by a lot of people. As another poster mentioned earlier, there is a lot of fuzzy math going on in

And it's been used to vilify DAS users and lump everyone using DAS with the people who are misusing or abusing it.

I agree with your analysis wholeheartedly. And I appreciate what you've both done here to keep this thread a much more positive experience.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Just for clarification I never got into the legal definition talk (which to me didn't even seem like it was even relevant) but I mentioned that as discussion was occurring even up until Wednesday of this week about what was immediate family and what wasn't when now that part has been removed from Disney's website.

People don't just tour the parks with their immediate family members (however one defines it) anyhow.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It adds to the confusion and frustration that even in the Before Times we weren’t all getting the same info from Disney.

True. Hopefully it'll be more consistent once this all settles down. People deserve consistency and for some people it really could be their only trip.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Just for clarification I never got into the legal definition talk (which to me didn't even seem like it was even relevant) but I mentioned that as discussion was occurring even up until Wednesday of this week about what was immediate family and what wasn't when now that part has been removed from Disney's website.

People don't just tour the parks with their immediate family members (however one defines it) anyhow.

Agree that people tour with more than just immediate family (and I know, Disney has removed that phrase from the page), but I can certainly see having to work with guests individually to limit the instances where more than four would be approved for DAS.

Simple example (not the only one), if I'm the DAS holder traveling with five other friends, then only four of us should be allowed to ride via any given return time. If I'm the DAS holder and I have a spouse and three young children, then I can absolutely see them allowing all five v. just four.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Agree that people tour with more than just immediate family (and I know, Disney has removed that phrase from the page), but I can certainly see having to work with guests individually to limit the instances where more than four would be approved for DAS.

Simple example (not the only one), if I'm the DAS holder traveling with five other friends, then only four of us should be allowed to ride via any given return time. If I'm the DAS holder and I have a spouse and three young children, then I can absolutely see them allowing all five v. just four.

I think we agreed on this point already

 

[OurBigTrip]

I think we agreed on this point already

Wasn't sure, based on our previous responses.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Wasn't sure, based on our previous responses.

We both agree Disney can/will make exceptions looking at individual traveling parties even with the adjustment in number of people and language on the website, I phrased it as a case by case basis. There's a million what ifs (including what does young children mean--remember the discussion about age and entering the queue) and whatever adjustment beyond the stated limit is not likely to be uniformly applied due to differences in traveling parties not just on the basis of relation or age either most especially when you're talking about riding attractions.

We do agree on the crux of the discussion around limit.

 

[lanejudy]

Not once has a CM said they could all remain in my approved DAS party and I’d just select the one/s riding with me at any given time! It adds to the confusion and frustration that even in the Before Times we weren’t all getting the same info from Disney.

My guess is this isn't as much not "getting the same info" as much as it's that your party changes more frequently than the guest who comes from a distance to visit for a few days or a week. Usually what is asked is who is in the party this visit -- and if there are extended members linked in MDE for that particular visit, they'll allow those extras to be linked to the DAS but only a max of 6 can use a Return Time. Next visit, those same extended party members wouldn't necessarily have tickets or be linked for plans this trip, therefore they are removed and DAS is set for the current party (which may be a subset or different). Your party simply changes more frequently. I don't know if there is a way around that, maybe? Try asking next time.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

I'm a big fan of Touringplans in general, so I just want to correct some of what's being written about them here that I think is a misunderstanding.

I've been following the thread on the other forum since the beginning. There have been no posts from Testa claiming DAS abuse that I’ve seen, or really anything of the sort. In addition, there have been no posts where he claims to have counted the number of DAS users in a line. The only thing that he's posted in that thread is raw data from his own team's counting of total people in the lightning lanes, information he has as to how many of those were G+ users, extrapolations based on that, and information he's been given by other castmembers/insiders. Others in that thread have definitely run with that information in a negative way, but I don’t think it’s fair to blame touringplans for the conduct of others.

 

[Unity]

I'm a big fan of Touringplans in general, so I just want to correct some of what's being written about them here that I think is a misunderstanding.

I've been following the thread on the other forum since the beginning. There have been no posts from Testa claiming DAS abuse that I’ve seen, or really anything of the sort. In addition, there have been no posts where he claims to have counted the number of DAS users in a line. The only thing that he's posted in that thread is raw data from his own team's counting of total people in the lightning lanes, information he has as to how many of those were G+ users, extrapolations based on that, and information he's been given by other castmembers/insiders. Others in that thread have definitely run with that information in a negative way, but I don’t think it’s fair to blame touringplans for the conduct of others.

Not necessarily blaming TouringPlans - heck, I've used them and their stuff a few times and I enjoy tuning into Disney Dish every once in a while - but I think it's more blaming the people talking about such data over and over without citing that as a source or even talking about the differences. [Though in his initial post he did mention those who 'really need DAS' and said he didn't think everyone who used it did - which is a reference to 'DAS abuse'.]

It's not LTs fault, but some people have run with these numbers and not completely understood what these statistics mean.

My guess is this isn't as much not "getting the same info" as much as it's that your party changes more frequently than the guest who comes from a distance to visit for a few days or a week. Usually what is asked is who is in the party this visit -- and if there are extended members linked in MDE for that particular visit, they'll allow those extras to be linked to the DAS but only a max of 6 can use a Return Time. Next visit, those same extended party members wouldn't necessarily have tickets or be linked for plans this trip, therefore they are removed and DAS is set for the current party (which may be a subset or different). Your party simply changes more frequently. I don't know if there is a way around that, maybe? Try asking next time.

I'm hoping this will be the way things are set-up!