Lawsuit over Disneyland's Magic Key Passport

[Moliphino]

I'm going to guess the reasonable expectation is that when you purchase a no-blackout AP you aren't blackout. If Disney couldn't reasonably accommodate during a busy season like the holidays then they should have not sold a no-blackout AP.

They aren't blacked out, though. The AP capacity is full for those dates.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

They aren't blacked out, though. The AP capacity is full for those dates.

Clearly we (and others) are not going to agree on "well no they weren't blackout" because what the lawsuit alleges and what others are saying is that in de facto it becomes a blackout when your pass is the reason you are not allowed access. Normally I'm all about "*sigh* another lawsuit" but this one this one I totally get.

 

[KPeterso]

OK just checked, with the pass any of the next 5 days available. A month ago none were available. You need to learn how to work the system, people book and cancel.

I activated my dream key in early September and have been 10 times already (and still have 8.5 months left in the year). Just need to have some flexibility for the reservations and keep checking and refreshing if you can't get a date. We went on Saturday and since then I have booked 12/26 and 1/1 which were both dates previously sold out. Availability is changing constantly if you just keep checking. I think at a certain point they also are releasing unused reservations from the other buckets to the AP one. I only say this because all of a sudden 2 weeks out there will be a ton of reservations for every day in a period of time.

I also find the comment about 3600 dream key holders invalid. There are so many more dream key holders out there.

 

[bcla]

They aren't blacked out, though. The AP capacity is full for those dates.

We don’t know what the numbers are though. Especially if it’s a much smaller base number during holiday periods. And Disney absolutely doesn’t want their proprietary data to be release during discovery.

If it were transparent then the lawsuit stands no chance. Something like an exact accounting of the number of pass holders at each level and the number of reservations available to them for specific days. It would be very interesting if they severely reduce the number of reservations available to pass holders around Christmas.

 

[bcla]

I activated my dream key in early September and have been 10 times already (and still have 8.5 months left in the year). Just need to have some flexibility for the reservations and keep checking and refreshing if you can't get a date. We went on Saturday and since then I have booked 12/26 and 1/1 which were both dates previously sold out. Availability is changing constantly if you just keep checking. I think at a certain point they also are releasing unused reservations from the other buckets to the AP one. I only say this because all of a sudden 2 weeks out there will be a ton of reservations for every day in a period of time.

I also find the comment about 3600 dream key holders invalid. There are so many more dream key holders out there.

Ibelieve it was a hypothetical figure just to advance the discussion.

 

[TwoMisfits]

Clearly we (and others) are not going to agree on "well no they weren't blackout" because what the lawsuit alleges and what others are saying is that in de facto it becomes a blackout when your pass is the reason you are not allowed access. Normally I'm all about "*sigh* another lawsuit" but this one this one I totally get.

I agree - if there is capacity in the park, they should be guaranteed to enter, pending any other restriction on their pass (like only reserving 3 days at one time). They should have had access to every pot, not just the AP pot, so they never have to "keep checking" to get in, but can make plans on reliance of what they bought...

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Availability is changing constantly if you just keep checking. I think at a certain point they also are releasing unused reservations from the other buckets to the AP one.

And that actually could be a big problem for Disney IMO (at least from my viewpoint). If you're constantly switching up the amount in each bucket then it could be construed that you are artificially impacting one's freedom to utilize the AP. In other words they would be manipulating demand as they see fit rather than a set finite number.

 

[MillauFr]

I think this case will demonstrate that it is not possible for Disney to offer an unlimited pass option. They are going to have to revamp the program again and that probably means eliminating the annual pass program as we know it. They will have to move to a variable pricing model that allows they to better control demand. There are simply too many people willing to shell out $2,000, $3,000, or even $4,000 for a seemly unlimited option.

 

[PirateBrigade]

I don't believe airline miles programs can reasonably be related to Disney's reservation system with all due respect. They just aren't the same in terms of how they function.

I actually think it's a good analogy -- advertise a product (airline mile, magic key) that gives you theoretical access to a limited product (airline seat, park admission), with reservations required.

In both cases, both airline and Disneyland are holding back physical capacity in favor of a higher paying walk-up fare (single day ticket). American Airlines was notorious for this many years ago, their availability charts were a joke.

For the plaintiff, the difference is going to be in how it was advertised (regardless of fine print, T&C's, etc...)

 

[disneychrista]

The flip side to this is they have one bucket for all passes and key holders gobble them up, now the general public can’t get reservations. Now Disney has pissed off another group of people.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I think this case will demonstrate that it is not possible for Disney to offer an unlimited pass option. They are going to have to revamp the program again and that probably means eliminating the annual pass program as we know it. They will have to move to a variable pricing model that allows they to better control demand. There are simply too many people willing to shell out $2,000, $3,000, or even $4,000 for a seemly unlimited option.

I know you like to talk about cost and such but that's pretty much pre-reservation system mentality. You have to not think about "well if they just charged more it would solve the problem". Because we don't know the proprietary information we don't know how many are allotted in each bucket, we don't know how many they shift and move around.

 

[MillauFr]

if there is capacity in the park

I think this is a key concept here. With current staffing there is no way they should allow 85,000 guests to enter the park. I think people also understand that hotel guests spending $800 a night on a room should be prioritized over other guests.

I don't think many here understand the overwhelming demand Disney has for their parks.

 

[PirateBrigade]

I think this case will demonstrate that it is not possible for Disney to offer an unlimited pass option. They are going to have to revamp the program again and that probably means eliminating the annual pass program as we know it. They will have to move to a variable pricing model that allows they to better control demand. There are simply too many people willing to shell out $2,000, $3,000, or even $4,000 for a seemly unlimited option.

I think in another thread I calculated the true market cost of an unlimited AP to be something close to $4k-5k. I calculated that based on someone going every weekend (say 50 weeks/yr) and being willing to pay a discounted $60 per week (roughly the cost of one person's dinner & drinks at Yardhouse or something) + value of discounts.

I really wonder what the true market equilibrium price is, because $1400-$1500 is nowhere near it.

 

[PirateBrigade]

Because we don't know the proprietary information we don't know how many are allotted in each bucket, we don't know how many they shift and move around.

That's why I'm so excited about this lawsuit, but also why 200% Disney will settle to avoid disclosing that valuable data.

 

[MillauFr]

I know you like to talk about cost and such but that's pretty much pre-reservation system mentality. You have to not think about "well if they just charged more it would solve the problem". Because we don't know the proprietary information we don't know how many are allotted in each bucket, we don't know how many they shift and move around.

Exactly. I don't think charging more is the option. Because no matter how high Disney jacked up the prices they will still have their current problems.

 

[MakiraMarlena]

My Disneyland friends do not believe that Disneyland ever made the promise that annual passholders "would be admitted to the parks so long as there is capacity." In fact, they are very clear about needing a park reservation, so there would be no such thing as "permanent unlimited admission." However, personally I think they should offer refunds for the APs if they can't get in when they want to, since they are now artificially limiting capacity for each park and distributing that capacity among different forms of admission. However, the very point for this is to limit access for annual passholders and open some of that capacity up for guests purchasing day tickets (who are likely to spend more in the parks anyway). It does help to solve Disneyland's passholder problem, and if Disneyland wants fewer AP guests, then offer them refunds.

Pretty sure the plaintiff in this action won't get anything.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I actually think it's a good analogy -- advertise a product (airline mile, magic key) that gives you theoretical access to a limited product (airline seat, park admission), with reservations required.

In both cases, both airline and Disneyland are holding back physical capacity in favor of a higher paying walk-up fare (single day ticket). American Airlines was notorious for this many years ago, their availability charts were a joke.

For the plaintiff, the difference is going to be in how it was advertised (regardless of fine print, T&C's, etc...)

The reason I didn't think it was applicable is because of how airline miles programs work. Your airline miles program is based on airline points, points you earn, anniversary points, bonus points, etc and an airline ticket explicitly tells you exactly how many points it costs to get a ticket. To me, personally speaking, if Disney had a system where you purchased or earned points that you could then redeem for park admission then it would be more applicable.

The discussion around "I want to fly with my miles at any time" but really that was around the busy holiday season well that is because it's just based on the cost of the miles. If the example used was you are blocked from using those miles during the holiday season even though the airline miles program you're with says you won't be then the example becomes more applicable. I think it was just making a connection between someone who wants to use miles when those miles would cost more during the holiday season (so they may not have enough to purchase the ticket) but because the AP system isn't built upon variable pricing per day but a set pass purchased that comes with benefits I wasn't thinking the connection was the same. I do believe the example used was just to show people want what they want regardless and they just have an unrealistic expectation but I guess I didn't see it as fair to compare an airline miles program with what we're talking about. I wouldn't side with a person who is using airline miles because it will tell them how many points it costs. That wouldn't be the same as how I feel about this AP issue where the pass was purchased and the pass is the explicit reason they are not allowed a reservation.

So it would appear we were thinking differently on the comparisons to be made.

That's why I'm so excited about this lawsuit, but also why 200% Disney will settle to avoid disclosing that valuable data.

Yeah if it's allowed to continue good chance Disney will settle, not necessarily because they think they are wrong, but because it would mean information gets out. But if they don't learn from this (if it gets far enough that is)...boy...

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Exactly. I don't think charging more is the option. Because no matter how high Disney jacked up the prices they will still have their current problems.

At least that's what I think. That's why I go back to they didn't realize how having an AP product would interact with a reservation system.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It solves the problem about Disneyland being overrun by passholders.

Which is why Disney, who knew, who boasted in the past just how many AP holders were at DLR, should have not brought in an AP with a reservation system at this time. It's like they were asking for trouble at some point down the road. I'm sure there would have been upset people but they could have offered a discounted ticket or bundle with restrictions for the days it could be used. Better than purchasing something only to be told the very product you purchased is why you can't get in but hey if you stay on site or purchase a single day or multi-day ticket we'll forget your AP is the issue.

 

[MillauFr]

I think what Disney did is more applicable to the airlines charging last minute ticket buyers thousands for seat on a sold out airplane. They then deny boarding to passengers with a confirmed ticket. This seems like it should be illegal but it isn't. They continue to do this. It is only when they drag seated passengers off the plane like United did and get a huge public relations backlash, do they change their practices.