Majority of dining scalping websites shut down by Disney

Many people responding here don't understand what sites like Scout did. They didn't make any reservations or in any way hold or take ADR's. I have heard of others that did, but I believe they were all shut down a while back, as we all agree they should be. I don't think it's fair to lump all the sites together.

The sites like Scout searched for a specified time and date at a restaurant, then sent a message if anything became available. To me, that sounds a lot like the airfare search tools that email you when the fare prices drop for a particular route. If Disney determined that the bots were a drain on their IT infrastructure, they could have just added a captcha step like ticketmaster and thousands of other websites have used for years. Of course, if it was the bots causing problems, then their reservations site should have been running better tonight, instead of constantly kicking me out and repeatedly giving the ' unable to search at this time ' error.

Actual improvement would be if they redesign their search interface to streamline end users' efforts, by allowing us to search for availability over multiple days or time frames. Then I wouldn't have to search 10+ different combinations, multiple times per day, trying to get a lunch reservation for 7 at Be Our Guest after plans changed 4 months out. The fact that people were willing to pay for a search service should have been taken as an indictment of their system. Instead of using litigation to bring these other sites down, they need to upgrade their own capabilities to make those outside services obsolete.


The legal issues that arise regarding sites that simply search for ADRs are really fascinating. This is really so new in the legal world that there will have to be a lot of litigation before things are settled. I read this on Wikipedia about web scraping:


Web scraping may be against the terms of use of some websites. The enforceability of these terms is unclear. While outright duplication of original expression will in many cases be illegal, in the United States the courts ruled in Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service that duplication of facts is allowable. U.S. courts have acknowledged that users of "scrapers" or "robots" may be held liable for committing trespass to chattels, which involves a computer system itself being considered personal property upon which the user of a scraper is trespassing. The best known of these cases, eBay v. Bidder's Edge, resulted in an injunction ordering Bidder's Edge to stop accessing, collecting, and indexing auctions from the eBay web site. This case involved automatic placing of bids, known as auction sniping. However, in order to succeed on a claim of trespass to chattels, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant intentionally and without authorization interfered with the plaintiff's possessory interest in the computer system and that the defendant's unauthorized use caused damage to the plaintiff. Not all cases of web spidering brought before the courts have been considered trespass to chattels.

I would think Disney has a good trespass to chattels legal argument.

I believe these sites really did have a negative impact on many Disney guests. Here is what can happen:

These sites use bots to constantly search Disney's dining reservations. Therefore, as soon as a popular ADR opens up, these sites send an email or text to people who paid to search for that particular ADR. The people searching get the email/text within a matter of seconds or minutes and can immediately book the ADR. Those of us who do not pay the search sites have virtually no chance of getting the hard-to-get reservations because we cannot search Disney's site every minute or so. The effect is that people who want to get a popular ADR (that was unavailable when we made our ADRs at 180 days) have no choice but to pay to get the ADR. Without these sites, Disney guests who diligently check for ADRs a few times a day on their own can usually get the ADRs they want. Therefore, the sites negatively affect our experience as Disney guests, which means Disney is negatively affected.

Truly interesting legal issues.
 
Without these sites, Disney guests who diligently check for ADRs a few times a day on their own can usually get the ADRs they want. Therefore, the sites negatively affect our experience as Disney guests, which means Disney is negatively affected.

On the other hand ...

The guests who make the bot-assisted reservations are positively affected.

And if the bots help Disney to maximize bookings by helping people to find their preferred reservations, then Disney is positively affected as well.

As (I think) I posted before, whenever you see a middleman find his way into a free market, it's not causing friction, but it happens because there already IS friction. The friction (or inefficiency) presents an opportunity for a middleman with special skills to step in, and help the buyer buy and the seller sell.

Disney caused friction by making a fairly clumsy reservation system that doesn't allow people to make themselves available for openings that might arise in the future. In other words the Disney system doesn't support a waiting list. It's unfair and causes friction because many people, possibly a majority of people, can't or won't sit in front of their computer banging on Disney's reservation system all day hoping for a dinner reservation to become available. That's on top of the already pretty ridiculous idea that you need to decide exactly when and where you're going to eat in 6 months.

Given the fairly dumb and (to some) annoying requirement to book dinner reservations months in advance, a middleman who significantly eases the amount of work that's involved and increases the odds of getting what you want is a net positive.
 
Good riddance, goodbye.

Disagree...

With the terrible Disney website and not all restuarants ready at 180 days, they server a function. Germany wasnt avalible for my week before Christmas trip and I didnt want to check everyday. So $7 was a good investment.
 

Disney never used to have a problem with reservations until about when the dining plan came to be. You used to go to the front of Epcot and see what was available for the day not online 180 days in advance. The demand has always been there and always will be but no other place other than WDW people stay up all night and book ADRs 180 days in advance. Disneyland doesn't do this, the foreign Disney parks don't do this, and universal doesn't do this. I have no problem with them offering it 180 days in advance and I do take advantage of that for my vacations but people go nuts over ADRs.

No problem?????

How about MANY restaurants not having reservations at 180 days, Im not talking Be our Guest, Im talking about restaurants not releasing reservations on time like Fantasmic and Germany. This had NOTHING to do with the other sites!
 
No problem?????

How about MANY restaurants not having reservations at 180 days, Im not talking Be our Guest, Im talking about restaurants not releasing reservations on time like Fantasmic and Germany. This had NOTHING to do with the other sites!
Dinner packages for fantasmic never come out at 180 days. I've never heard of Germany not coming out 180 days in advance but I know some places do not release at 180 days. Not every restaurant on Disney property is owned by Disney either.
 
/
Dinner packages for fantasmic never come out at 180 days. I've never heard of Germany not coming out 180 days in advance but I know some places do not release at 180 days. Not every restaurant on Disney property is owned by Disney either.

Thats incorrect Brown Derby was available and Hollywood Vin just not Mama Melrose
 
Thats incorrect Brown Derby was available and Hollywood Vin just not Mama Melrose
Ok I shouldn't have said never but it is very common for fantasmic dinner packages to not come out at 180 days. This kind of proves the fact that people are crazy for ADRs.
 
On the other hand ...

The guests who make the bot-assisted reservations are positively affected.

And if the bots help Disney to maximize bookings by helping people to find their preferred reservations, then Disney is positively affected as well.

As (I think) I posted before, whenever you see a middleman find his way into a free market, it's not causing friction, but it happens because there already IS friction. The friction (or inefficiency) presents an opportunity for a middleman with special skills to step in, and help the buyer buy and the seller sell.

Disney caused friction by making a fairly clumsy reservation system that doesn't allow people to make themselves available for openings that might arise in the future. In other words the Disney system doesn't support a waiting list. It's unfair and causes friction because many people, possibly a majority of people, can't or won't sit in front of their computer banging on Disney's reservation system all day hoping for a dinner reservation to become available. That's on top of the already pretty ridiculous idea that you need to decide exactly when and where you're going to eat in 6 months.

Given the fairly dumb and (to some) annoying requirement to book dinner reservations months in advance, a middleman who significantly eases the amount of work that's involved and increases the odds of getting what you want is a net positive.





It is a net positive for those who don't mind paying a concierge service. For those of us who are independent and frugal, it is detrimental.

According to Marina Krakovsky, there are five types of middlemen:

The Bridge spans distance that can take the form of physical distance, social distance or time.
The Certifier helps us determine quality of the good or service.
The Enforcer ensures that the parties to an agreement perform as agreed.
The Risk Bearer either bears risk or aggregates risk so that it is reduced.
The Concierge makes life easier, reducing the time or cost of a transaction.

The dining sites really fall into the Concierge category by reducing the time of a transaction (reducing the time certain consumers spend searching for an ADR). But in doing so, they drive up the cost of the transaction for those willing to pay, and they drive up the time required for (and reduce the possibility of) obtaining an ADR for everyone else. The dining sites offered none of the other middleman benefits of the Bridge, the Certifier, the Enforcer, or the Risk Bearer.

This is indeed all well and good for those who are willing to pay for the additional concierge service, but not good for the majority of Disney customers who do not want to do that.

Because Disney already faces so many issues with people claiming that they are pricing out the middle class, Disney does not need other companies that are in no way affiliated with Disney to drive up the cost and frustration of planning a Disney vacation. They don't need other companies that make a Disney vacation seem like an elite vacation where the rich can buy themselves into shorter lines and hard-to-get ADRs rather than a family vacation.

The dining sites drive up costs for some and planning time and frustration for others, with no benefit whatsoever to the Disney company.


I agree that Disney's reservation system could be better. There is no question about that. But it is better for them to fix their reservation system than for us to have pay someone else to "fix" Disney's system.

I have had this conversation with my husband and he argues with me on the legal issues. His background is technology and mine is law, so we see things differently (so please don't be offended - I fully respect your opinion and appreciate your engaging with me on this topic- just as I appreciate my husband's difference of opinion). DH says that the courts are wrong for saying that companies have a property interest in their websites. He says Disney could easily fix this issue with their technology rather than having to take legal steps to prevent the bots from hitting their system. I don't know enough about technology to understand the nuances of how Disney might do that, but he says it can be done. Who knows? Maybe they are working on that right now.


Personally, I hold deep animosity toward scalpers and hate paying others to do what I can do myself for free (yes, I have to deal with some middlemen, but in the case of obtaining ADRs, I really don't need anyone else's help). So I am glad the sites are gone.

From a legal standpoint, I look forward to seeing what happens with technology cases like these.

I hope you get all the ADRs you want on future trips one way or another. :)
 
Im glad they shut them down but I don't feel that they are all gone because I have release reservations that were snapped up less than a minute later. And on more than 1 occasion. they need to keep looking and keep shutting them down!
 
Im glad they shut them down but I don't feel that they are all gone because I have release reservations that were snapped up less than a minute later. And on more than 1 occasion. they need to keep looking and keep shutting them down!

I'm sure, and it wouldn't be hard to write and sell software that does that directly for you on your own PC.

That said, I had no issue snagging an 8AM at CRT and a 6PM at BOG this morning, so things are definitely better.
 
Stuff like this is a major reason Disney sites have so much trouble. They are slammed enough with regular Disney guests, add 3,000,000 more hits from Bots trying to make money, and you have an even broader scam than selling the "disabled guest services"

Not really... The calls from those sites are such a minor amount of the traffic that it has zero to little effect on the sites performance. Disney sites are bad because they are poorly designed and poorly implemented and poorly managed. Disney IT is a joke. On the web side, too much effort in style and not enough in substance has plagued them for years. Don't Blame the dining site cells... That's just not true at all.
 
You're only charged if you don't show. And Corporate accounts can have thousands of numbers so.....
Am quite certain that if they did have any reservations left the day before they would be charged that they would then dump the reservation.

There are two different thi
For our 25th wedding anniversary, I'd like to go to Victoria and Alberts on April 13 2016. This is 180 days from now. Through Disney's dining reservation site, it only tells me the query result is no tables available, it does not suggest what is available. I am left to search from day to day. If there was a service that would do that for me, I would use it.

Perhaps WDW needs to add a "suggest" to the results, saying your request is not possible, but here is one that is....

I guess the next move is to call 800-W-DISNEY and book an on-site stay with dinner reservations at V&A. Perhaps they can tell me what is available around that particular day.

Call v and A. There is some bug between the ressie system and V and A. That's what they told me when I booked with them for my Dec trip.
 
Thank goodness! But it still seems ridiculously difficult to get character dining! Thank goodness for the cancellation forum! People helping people... Though I suspect a lot of people have three times the reservations they need until fast pass and other plans are made.
 
Though I suspect a lot of people have three times the reservations they need until fast pass and other plans are made.

This shows what a tangled web Disney created, when they started to encourage the booking not just of restaurant meals months in advance, but then the booking of individual, 3-minute rides.

I've accused them before of trying to impose a cruise ship model on the resort, as if meal times, recreation times and excursions have to be booked far in advance. Not an ordinary cruise ship either, but one that is extremely large but also extremely crowded.

It has a certain logic to it, if you think it's a good idea when you have an extremely successful product to stop producing more of the product but to try to ration the same amount of product to a growing number of customers ... for a larger and larger price.

If you think that's logical and reasonable, then I think you also have to accept that there are going to be a lot of complications and stress arising from the business model. Like having to impose more and more complicated rules in the attempt to maintain the fairness of the rationing system. Then adding rules on top of rules. For example, people start booking restaurants months in advance. But they don't really know what they're going to be doing every hour of every day so they book many restaurants for the same date. So Disney imposes a fee for no-shows. So people continue to hoard ressies, but they release the surplus ones when their plans firm up. So people have to join an online community to trade cancelled ressies, or else they have to bang on the Disney website all day, or they have to pay a third party to bang on disney.com for them. But to make it fair, Disney had to ban those bots from banging on their website. And so on ...

Bottom line: rationing causes hoarding and black markets.
 














Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!

Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top