Disneyland Eliminates Early Entry for Resort Hotel Guests Beginning January 5, 2026

I just wish those same hotels had safe connection routes for ECVs. We're stuck using Disneyland hotels so we can use our ecvs which we can't get around much without.
We've stayed at the Candy Cane and at one of the Marriott hotels (maybe the Fairfield) across from the parks with ECVs with no problem. Both charged ECVs in their lobbies for pickup the next morning and crossing over to DLs wasn't a big deal.

Wow. Flabbergasted by this decision. We booked DVC points to stay at the GCH in April, which are non refundable. Coming from Australia it’s our once/decade DL trip. Bringing a friend who has never experienced any Disney parks. Already hard to explain to her why the hotel was so $$$$ now this.. :(((
They should absolutely make these refundable given this change. Bait and switch. Although that won't help with the rest of the expense/scheduling done for your trip. I'd be very angry if I'd already booked for 2026 and was just now finding this out.

Of course this starts the very day we arrive for our stay at Grand Californian. 😩
Ugh, so sorry!

can anyone report on the ee usage since the announcement? just curious if it seems busier or still “not utilized by many”

we go early sept and for sure will use it every day
Ironically, I have a December trip planned and am now considering changing my hotel from offsite to the DLH. One last EE trip before it's done.
 
My coworker was just telling me that they stayed in one of the Universal Studios Orlando hotels that gives you an included Universal Express unlimited pass for every single day of your stay, including check-in and check-out days.

Even when Disney wasn't nickel and diming, they weren't offering similar. EE was a good benefit that did see good utilization (the crowds lined up at security before the sunrise was a decent indication). Comparing to USO really highlights how ridiculous scaling this back to nothing is.
Their Top 3 hotels, they call them Signature Collection. It would be nice if DL would do it since they have competition from the offsite hotels. I think WDW has too many Deluxe to offer it free.
 

I don't disagree but don't you think that more the corporate culture in the US rather than specific to Disney.

With poorly run companies, yes. But there still are companies that don't nickel and dime their customers at every turn yet still earn massive profits. (Costco comes to mind) But I remember just 10 years ago Disney was a well run company that gave its customers fantastic value yet still made money hand over fist every quarter just like Costco. My hope is Disney can get a new CEO from outside of the company that brings the company back to those profitable times where the company, shareholders and consumers were all very pleased with the company.
 
@BriannaRuth (couldn’t quote your post)

Disney would have refunded PP with the DVC booking had they booked direct. PP chose to rent points and did not do so from an outfit that allows refunds (not unusual). That is a common way to save money but you take on this exact risk. Disney’s only obligation is toward the owner- and in fact Disney would refund the owner. However, when the owner rented out their points they chose to rent them out non-refundable. PP willingly accepted the risk that offerings could change when they completed the transaction in order to save money on their trip.
 
Absolutely! They showed how much they value high spending customers when they unveiled the perks at new signature hotel Helios! …oh, wait…
Imagine if Disney announced they were charging $125 for non guest parking at any of there hotels.....The torches and pitchforks would be in full force.
 
I don't disagree but don't you think that more the corporate culture in the US rather than specific to Disney.

You're not wrong. But, corporate culture is more than greed. Profits are definitely important. But, in Corporate America, today, there is more at stake than even 20 years ago. Examples would be ESG scores, inclusivity standards and something I call trend riding.

What is "riding the trend"? Unfortunately, many corporations (even TWDC) is moving towards a benign, "coffee shop", bland offering and style is vogue. Everything is a shade of gray and flat logos. You largely abandon the ideals that the company was founded upon and what drove customers to the company.

Here is a current hub-bub about Cracker Barrel and its rebrand. Cracker Barrel whether you like it or dislike the restaurant is a southern country store for families to eat at. No alcohol. Hearty breakfast with good food. Gather around and socialize. Southern kitchy stuff to buy after your meal. Wood floors. Fireplace. Wait staff that had high appearance standards and wore uniforms that fit the company's goals and ideals. Cracker barrel has abandoned all or many of these things that built its customer-base and is chasing a trend.

On the opposite end, think about the current hub-bub with American Eagle. They have a buxom blonde in a pair of jeans and not much more, and there was a lot of people upset with the campaign. Now these people will make up all sorts of ridiculous reasons why they object to Sydney Sweeney in a pair of jeans, but for me, the people who are upset and on some sort of crusade are probably upset that American Eagle is bucking the trend and going back to what was being done to sell jeans in the 1990s. That's why my DW and I shrug our shoulders, because American Eagle is doing the same thing as Guess did 30 years ago with Claudia Schiffer, Anna Nicole Smith, Drew Barrymore, etc. etc. It may not be the trend today, but it was how jeans were marketed many decades ago and my DW and I are just accustomed to it, I guess.

Look at what TWDC is doing in many regards to its hotels and parks and even the studios to a degree. You get rid of the unique character, color and stylings that were synonymous with Disney parks and hotels and movies. And that was what TWDC built its brand off of was family-fun offerings. Instead, TWDC is chasing trends and not building on the ideals that built the company. There is a lot of flat logos and shades of gray.

Serve alcohol in DL. Sure. Serve alcohol in MK. Sure. Isn't the park for families? Yeah, but the trend is offer alcohol.

Relaxed standards for CMs. Sure. Even if it detriments the storytelling. Sure, who cares about storytelling? That crap was Walt's idea. He's dead. His ideas should be dead too, right?

Many DVC or hotel recent brandings and they lack whimsy and color and stylings that were vibrant and told a great story. The makeovers are often just bland shades of gray or beige, sterile modern looks that don't invoke a family-fun story in the room. It sucks the life out of the story.

Compare logos. Which logo has character and fun and joy. Which logo is clean and bland and boring.

1755868931254.png 1755868972788.png

This type of corporate culture has me concerned as much as greed to diminish the guest experience with the division of your company that has been delivering the biggest revenues to help your profitability and stock price. Lord knows that Bob Iger cannot point to ESPN or LucasFilm or D+ etc. to have been delivering great profits for the company over the past 5 years.
 
Last edited:
Compare logos. Which logo has character and fun and joy. Which logo is clean and bland and boring.

View attachment 995918 View attachment 995920

There's a lot in your post that I agree with, and some that I disagree with, however the logo comparison is't really apt. One, Disney still uses the logo on the left - it is their primary identity for motion pictures. The Disney+ logo may be a bit more sterile, but it is intended to be an icon for an app, so it's best not to make it super complicated. I too kind of hate the modern trend of "coffreed shop chic" for EVERYTHING - I mean, its' fine for coffee shops, but not McDonald's - but I am not sure that the logo is a good example of that.
 
All I can think is that this is how Universal starts winning the customer experience war.
IMO they have a long way to go. I go to both resorts (the ones in FL) and Disney has significantly better customer service. It's not even close.

This decision by Disney still sucks though. I'm happy to see that most people are criticizing it outside of the few diehard cheerleaders.
 
With poorly run companies, yes. But there still are companies that don't nickel and dime their customers at every turn yet still earn massive profits. (Costco comes to mind) But I remember just 10 years ago Disney was a well run company that gave its customers fantastic value yet still made money hand over fist every quarter just like Costco. My hope is Disney can get a new CEO from outside of the company that brings the company back to those profitable times where the company, shareholders and consumers were all very pleased with the company.

Costco may or may not nickel and dime its customers but they force companies into very small margins if they want their products in them. There is a reason they can sell products for so much less. It isn’t because they are warm hearted. It is because they purchased the products for less.
 
You're not wrong. But, corporate culture is more than greed. Profits are definitely important. But, in Corporate America, today, there is more at stake than even 20 years ago. Examples would be ESG scores, inclusivity standards and something I call trend riding.

What is "riding the trend"? Unfortunately, many corporations (even TWDC) is moving towards a benign, "coffee shop", bland offering and style is vogue. Everything is a shade of gray and flat logos. You largely abandon the ideals that the company was founded upon and what drove customers to the company.

Here is a current hub-bub about Cracker Barrel and its rebrand. Cracker Barrel whether you like it or dislike the restaurant is a southern country store for families to eat at. No alcohol. Hearty breakfast with good food. Gather around and socialize. Southern kitchy stuff to buy after your meal. Wood floors. Fireplace. Wait staff that had high appearance standards and wore uniforms that fit the company's goals and ideals. Cracker barrel has abandoned all or many of these things that built its customer-base and is chasing a trend.

On the opposite end, think about the current hub-bub with American Eagle. They have a buxom blonde in a pair of jeans and not much more, and there was a lot of people upset with the campaign. Now these people will make up all sorts of ridiculous reasons why they object to Sydney Sweeney in a pair of jeans, but for me, the people who are upset and on some sort of crusade are probably upset that American Eagle is bucking the trend and going back to what was being done to sell jeans in the 1990s. That's why my DW and I shrug our shoulders, because American Eagle is doing the same thing as Guess did 30 years ago with Claudia Schiffer, Anna Nicole Smith, Drew Barrymore, etc. etc. It may not be the trend today, but it was how jeans were marketed many decades ago and my DW and I are just accustomed to it, I guess.

Look at what TWDC is doing in many regards to its hotels and parks and even the studios to a degree. You get rid of the unique character, color and stylings that were synonymous with Disney parks and hotels and movies. And that was what TWDC built its brand off of was family-fun offerings. Instead, TWDC is chasing trends and not building on the ideals that built the company. There is a lot of flat logos and

Serve alcohol in DL. Sure. Serve alcohol in MK. Sure. Isn't the park for families? Yeah, but the trend is offer alcohol.

Relaxed standards for CMs. Sure. Even if it detriments the storytelling. Sure, who cares about storytelling? That crap was Walt's idea. He's dead. His ideas should be dead too, right?

Many DVC or hotel recent brandings and they lack whimsy and color and stylings that were vibrant and told a great story. The makeovers are often just bland shades of gray or beige, sterile modern looks that don't invoke a family-fun story in the room. It sucks the life out of the story.

Compare logos. Which logo has character and fun and joy. Which logo is clean and bland and boring.

View attachment 995918 View attachment 995920

This type of corporate culture has me concerned as much as greed to diminish the guest experience with the division of your company that has been delivering the biggest revenues to help your profitability and stock price. Lord knows that Bob Iger cannot point to ESPN or LucasFilm or D+ etc. to have been delivering great profits for the company over the past 5 years.
You, sir, are truly a Jedi and a very WISE and ASTUTE one! You said it all.
 
@BriannaRuth (couldn’t quote your post)

Disney would have refunded PP with the DVC booking had they booked direct. PP chose to rent points and did not do so from an outfit that allows refunds (not unusual). That is a common way to save money but you take on this exact risk. Disney’s only obligation is toward the owner- and in fact Disney would refund the owner. However, when the owner rented out their points they chose to rent them out non-refundable. PP willingly accepted the risk that offerings could change when they completed the transaction in order to save money on their trip.
Yes, I’m aware. Although still paying AUD$950/night so really not cheap :/ 4 nights as well :/
 
I got a survey from Disney about my using their website to book a room at the GCH (I didn't because the rate is INSANE) and I made sure I filled that baby out and indicated the price was too high and I'll be booking at another hotel nearby. I wish they had included a space to leave a comment, but I'm glad I at least got to provide some feedback.
 






New Posts









Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top