New credit card guarantees. Restaurant list, policy & common questions in 1st post

[mcd2745]

I wish they'd shorten the ADR window to correspond with the 45 cancellation penalty/package payoff date so that fewer people would be booking "on spec" for trips that they may or may not take, and that they would hold out some tables for walk-ups and leave the Fastpass system well enough alone. But you're right - it seems like Disney is going in the exact opposite direction and it is making WDW less desirable as a destination for my family. I don't want more structure and deadlines in my vacation than in my real life! We're thinking our post-Fantasyland expansion trip in the winter of 2013/4 may be the last for a while if these trends continue.

Completely agree about the ADR window...but I've been saying that till I'm blue in the face.

I also agree about the direction Disney seems to be taking - particulalry when you consider a lot of the ideas flating around about NextGen. I believe Disney's thinking is (and it's probably based off feedback they've received) that people want to plan like crazy before their trip and then once they've arrived in the World, all aspects of the trip are taken care of and that will allow people to get the "most" out of their trip. I don't necessarily agree with that line of thinking myself (and for the record, I don't think that this new cancellation policy is part of that line of thinking). But we all have seen plenty of people here on the DIS who would plan out every nano-second of their trips if they could. And I think that segment, for whatever reason, seems to have Disney's "ear". They're why we have that 180-day window now.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

I'm for this policy, but I don't see it benefiting me in any way. I make one set of ADRs - and keep them (and go to those meals). So I don't personally expect to see any benefit (or harm). I'm in favor of the policy because I think it addresses an issue that needed to be addressed. Many disagree, but I believe it will significantly cut down on the hoarding and will result in less empty tables and therefore is the right thing to do. If it were totally up to me, is this exactly how I would have addressed it? No. But, this is better than keeping things as they were.

This & the fact that people will now have to think twice, before taking an ADR date & time out of the system preventing someone else from getting it, are the main reasons I like the new policy too. The ability to make same day ADRs pales in comparison to this for me.

You're right, I don't. What's more, it doesn't matter to me. I don't own the restaurant (well, the teeniest, tiniest, most minuscule little bit of it - but not enough for any reason to matter to me).

But if the reason for the short-cancel/no-show fee is, as I suspect, multi-purpose - to get guests to show up for or cancel with reasonable notice ADRs they made (usually long) before arrival AND to make ADRs available same day to guests who didn't know they needed to or couldn't plan ahead - then it makes absolute sense.

I'm not talking about walk-ups, and neither is tarheelfan. Snurk71's 'test' calls to WDW dining indicate cancellations will be accepted online until just before midnight the day before without incurring a penalty. There was a lot of 'concern' earlier in the thread about disillusioning first or second time visitors - yet these are the guests most likely to need same day ADRs. Seems to me, having dining plan credits and not being able to use them would upset people even more.

You're totally right on the bolded & on the fact that people would be much more upset about not being able to use DDP credits. I really don't think anyone is that concerned for first & second time visitors. It was just thrown out there as an attempt to bolster an argument.

wow common sense





Please then tell me what it is then....it is a meal plain and simple...last time I checked if they serve food and you eat it from a plate...it is a meal. To try to elevate it or call it anything beyond that is silly. I dont care if the Pope is coming to dine...it is still a MEAL! It can be filet mignon or scrambled eggs, it is still a meal by definition.

And yes I can book elsewhere, but I dont like my choices being limited so I will voice my displeasure with the new system.



Yep I plan but I worry too.

Well, you could say the attractions are just rides, the parades are just parades, the fireworks are just fireworks, & the shows are just shows. If that were the case, why would any of us go to WDW? We can find those things many places. We have meals every night at home. On vacation, we look for dining experiences to enjoy as a family. To me, there's a big difference in a dining experience & just a meal.

 

[pinkerbell]

Indulge me for a moment here... I'm going off track and hope I make myself clear enough in the end so you see why.
Busines's no longer feel there is a "cost of doing business" ANything that is not profitbale every second of the day has to be re-evaluated and is deemed a looser, when in fact there truly is an overall gain, just not every 60 seconds of every minute of every hour.. This is where good business practives comes in and "service'.
Disney built it's reputation on providing superior "Service" to their guets in all area's. Fast forward to now, when CEO's make more than they should and the buck stops there. Everybody want's immediate gratification (stockholders) and no-body is in anything for the long haul, regardless of your spot in the chain.
So after all our informative discussions and all the enlightenment I have received about DIsney DIning and it's operations, I feel none of what anyone has stated about the reason's (including my own) have a rat's tail to do with the real reason for this policy which is A bunch of people somewhere, trying to prove their "worth" who could care less about our vacations (cause they are number crunchers and don't realize Disney is a hospitality industry) are making policies that affect them in ways that they do not care about (because they dont go to parks, they crunch numbers for fun) other than numbers which in all reality probably have much less of an impact that even the most conservative person could estimate. ANd the end result is ~ if in the begining for any reason $$ go up, the will calim the success. And if in the future, cause it will take time for people to learn of the overplanning necessary, and it is getting quite CRAZY (and I LOVE to plan, for me it's used to be 1/2 the fun of the vacation) Will not return in the future. But by then the number crunchers and overpaid CEO's will have all moved on to something else and this will be but a distant memory....

 

[Lewisc]

Good point. Assume a higher level of "no shows" during heavy rain. Most business accept that as the cost of doing business.

Indulge me for a moment here... I'm going off track and hope I make myself clear enough in the end so you see why.
Busines's no longer feel there is a "cost of doing business" ANything that is not profitbale every second of the day has to be re-evaluated and is deemed a looser, when in fact there truly is an overall gain, just not every 60 seconds of every minute of every hour.. This is where good business practives comes in and "service'.
....

 

[mcd2745]

Good point. Assume a higher level of "no shows" during heavy rain. Most business accept that as the cost of doing business.

That is the exact opposite of what Disney is trying to accomplish. They are trying to not only decrease the overall average no-show rate as much as possible, but also diminish the variance within that average rate as much as possible also.

 

[Lewisc]

That is the exact opposite of what Disney is trying to accomplish. They are trying to not only decrease the overall average no-show rate as much as possible, but also diminish the variance within that average rate as much as possible also.

I understand that. You don't understand my point (and the poster I quoted)

Posters in this thread are concentrating on "bad" guests who book ADRs "on spec". Make 2 ADRs for the same meal. Make more total ADRs then meals they plan on dining.

Heavy rains results in some guests staying in their resort. Staying in whatever attraction/gift shop they're visiting. Going back to their resort to get dry clothing and dry shoes.

Business accept empty tables, under those circumstances, as the "cost of doing business". Goodwill. There is a difference between going after "bad guests" who overbook (and don't cancel) and deciding to extract revenue from "good guests" who don't show due to overseen circumstances. Same answer with customers who just don't feel well. How many restaurants charge a customer who calls and says someone in his party isn't feeling well. The answer I get is something like I hope you'll be able to dine with us when your wife is feeling better. Hope she gets well soon. Not something like your credit card will be charged a penalty. Too bad.

JMO but the same bean counters who decided Disney should impose holiday surcharges have now decided to improve revenue by charging guests who don't show.Why limit your restaurant revenue to guests who dine. Why not also collect $$$ from guests who don't dine.

People want solutions. Link ADRs to your room reservation. Don't allow 2 reservations at the same meal window. Maybe don't allow more then 2 ADRs per day. What are the chances of a guest actually showing up for 3 character (or signature meals) the same day. Hold back a % of tables for later reservations and/or walk ups. Dramatically reduce the reservation window for guests not staying at a WDW resort. 30 days? 60 days?

Accidentally break an item in a store. Most items most stores. You can offer to pay. Your offer will usually be declined. Absolutely no reason why a store couldn't charge, most circumstances. They don't. Goodwill. Cost of doing business.

edited to add Actually we don't know what Disney is trying to accomplish. It may have nothing to do with reducing no-shows or variance. It could be as simple as looking for a new source of $$$.

 

[d-r]

I haven't read this whole thread, of course, but I can readily see some positive and negative aspects to this.

One thought that occurs to me is that it will be basically impossible for "walk-ups" to ever get a table at certain restaurants now.

Take 'Ohana for example. There are a lot of folks who are just casually on vacation who will stay at the polly and walk up at 'Ohana. The last time I was there they had moved the check-in to the other side, and had a separate place for reservations and walk-ups. The line to check-in for walk-ups was much longer than the line for reservations.

Now think about this. Use 'Ohana for an example. 'Ohana *always* books up solid for reservations. I'd say usually months out. There are no reservations left. Now, if everyone who has one of these reservations has a cash deposit, they are simply not going to not show up. They'll get there. Especially if they are on one of the dining plans where they will worry about using their credits up. There will be some savvy folks who get lucky by calling 24 hours before and getting a cancellation. But by the time of the night, the place will be booked solid. "No-shows" gave some room to fit in those walk-up people.

I know that they will use an algorithm to not open every table for reservations and hold some back for walk-ups. But when you consider that these are the most popular restaurants, they will be booked solid for whatever portion are open to reservations. I can't really think of a scenario where that will benefit a person walking-up, and that is going to end meaning more disappointed tourists.

On the flip side, I can not believe that Disney is doing this "just to nickel and dime and make some extra money" because this is going to cost them money to operate a phone line, to put in place the cast members, etc.

What it will serve to do is to better even out demand for some of the less popular places - cynically, another way that they could have done that would have been to improve the quality of the less popular places, imho.

 

[Mkrop]

The whole dining system at WDW is bizarre compared to the outside world.

No restuarant in the outside world excpet maybe some really high end places have you book 6 months out. And even then someone could slip the hostess money and they would "find" them a table...not a good thing but it is done.

No restuarant in the outside world would penalize someone for cancelling due to sickness or weather...as Lewisc posted, they would see that as a cost of doing business and encourage the diner to come again soon.

and RARELY do HOTEL restaurants in the outside world turn away patrons of their hotel who want to dine...usually that moves you higher on a priority list bc you are staying there. Now some people are staying in hotels in WDW and cant even eat in a table service restaurant in their own hotel. I know many people who came back from WDW astonished by this.

My neighbors own 3 restuarants and they would never conduct business this way.

 

[dismommom]

So why do I foresee a jump in no-shows at the restaurants not on the list, as people book those for their back-up plans..........

Per haps some of the problem is the type, quality, etc of the food at the less popular restaurants. If they specialize in something fine, but maybe add a few items for Picky eaters. We went to Mexico once and were not thrilled with authenic Mexican as we are not used to it. They did make efforts to get us a toned down meal. But we probably won't go there again unless the menu affers some new items.

 

[pinkerbell]

I understand that. You don't understand my point (and the poster I quoted)

Posters in this thread are concentrating on "bad" guests who book ADRs "on spec". Make 2 ADRs for the same meal. Make more total ADRs then meals they plan on dining.

Heavy rains results in some guests staying in their resort. Staying in whatever attraction/gift shop they're visiting. Going back to their resort to get dry clothing and dry shoes.

Business accept empty tables, under those circumstances, as the "cost of doing business". Goodwill. There is a difference between going after "bad guests" who overbook (and don't cancel) and deciding to extract revenue from "good guests" who don't show due to overseen circumstances. Same answer with customers who just don't feel well. How many restaurants charge a customer who calls and says someone in his party isn't feeling well. The answer I get is something like I hope you'll be able to dine with us when your wife is feeling better. Hope she gets well soon. Not something like your credit card will be charged a penalty. Too bad.

JMO but the same bean counters who decided Disney should impose holiday surcharges have now decided to improve revenue by charging guests who don't show.Why limit your restaurant revenue to guests who dine. Why not also collect $$$ from guests who don't dine.

People want solutions. Link ADRs to your room reservation. Don't allow 2 reservations at the same meal window. Maybe don't allow more then 2 ADRs per day. What are the chances of a guest actually showing up for 3 character (or signature meals) the same day. Hold back a % of tables for later reservations and/or walk ups. Dramatically reduce the reservation window for guests not staying at a WDW resort. 30 days? 60 days?

Accidentally break an item in a store. Most items most stores. You can offer to pay. Your offer will usually be declined. Absolutely no reason why a store couldn't charge, most circumstances. They don't. Goodwill. Cost of doing business.

edited to add Actually we don't know what Disney is trying to accomplish. It may have nothing to do with reducing no-shows or variance. It could be as simple as looking for a new source of $$$.

 

[mcd2745]

I understand that. You don't understand my point (and the poster I quoted)

Posters in this thread are concentrating on "bad" guests who book ADRs "on spec". Make 2 ADRs for the same meal. Make more total ADRs then meals they plan on dining.

Heavy rains results in some guests staying in their resort. Staying in whatever attraction/gift shop they're visiting. Going back to their resort to get dry clothing and dry shoes.

Business accept empty tables, under those circumstances, as the "cost of doing business". Goodwill. There is a difference between going after "bad guests" who overbook (and don't cancel) and deciding to extract revenue from "good guests" who don't show due to overseen circumstances. Same answer with customers who just don't feel well. How many restaurants charge a customer who calls and says someone in his party isn't feeling well. The answer I get is something like I hope you'll be able to dine with us when your wife is feeling better. Hope she gets well soon. Not something like your credit card will be charged a penalty. Too bad.

JMO but the same bean counters who decided Disney should impose holiday surcharges have now decided to improve revenue by charging guests who don't show.Why limit your restaurant revenue to guests who dine. Why not also collect $$$ from guests who don't dine.

People want solutions. Link ADRs to your room reservation. Don't allow 2 reservations at the same meal window. Maybe don't allow more then 2 ADRs per day. What are the chances of a guest actually showing up for 3 character (or signature meals) the same day. Hold back a % of tables for later reservations and/or walk ups. Dramatically reduce the reservation window for guests not staying at a WDW resort. 30 days? 60 days?

Accidentally break an item in a store. Most items most stores. You can offer to pay. Your offer will usually be declined. Absolutely no reason why a store couldn't charge, most circumstances. They don't. Goodwill. Cost of doing business.

edited to add Actually we don't know what Disney is trying to accomplish. It may have nothing to do with reducing no-shows or variance. It could be as simple as looking for a new source of $$$.

I understand what you're saying about "goodwill" and the "cost of doing business", and that is how they had been operating all along. But clearly, that "cost of doing business" is getting too expensive because of the abusive (in the case of the hoarders) or apathetic (in most other cases) behavior of their customers. It's the old "give an inch and they'll take a yard" scenario. And it's not just the hoarders IMO. This thread is full of people essentially saying they felt little or no level of committment to show up at the ADRs they chose to make as they blew them off for a variety of reasons - some valid, but most... not so much.


Do we know exactly what they are trying to accomplish? Barring an official statement about why they're doing this, no. But if I were a betting man (and I've been known to place a wager or two), I would bet the ranch that it is not to nickel and dime guests. I would bet that the intention is to 1) reduce no-shows and get a tighter variance within the reduced rate and 2) hopefully spread out the overall demand to some of the restaurants not on the list.

The whole dining system at WDW is bizarre compared to the outside world.

No restuarant in the outside world excpet maybe some really high end places have you book 6 months out.

Finally...something we can agree on!

 

[Colleen27]

I understand what you're saying about "goodwill" and the "cost of doing business", and that is how they had been operating all along. But clearly, that "cost of doing business" is getting too expensive because of the abusive (in the case of the hoarders) or apathetic (in most other cases) behavior of their customers. It's the old "give an inch and they'll take a yard" scenario. And it's not just the hoarders IMO. This thread is full of people essentially saying they felt little or no level of committment to show up at the ADRs they chose to make as they blew them off for a variety of reasons - some valid, but most... not so much.

I don't think that is clear at all. In fact, I think it is far more probable that it is Disney's tolerance for such costs of doing business that has changed, rather than a matter of guest behaviour changing significantly enough for those costs to rise.

 

[Mom of 2 Wife of 1]

The whole dining system at WDW is bizarre compared to the outside world.

No restuarant in the outside world excpet maybe some really high end places have you book 6 months out.

My neighbors own 3 restuarants and they would never conduct business this way.

That's probably because no other restaurant in the world has anything to do with the #1 tourist destination on planet Earth. Why do people even bother comparing anything in the outside world with WDW? WDW charges $18 for honey sesame chicken at Nine Dragons so they can pay for the diesel fuel in the third largest bus system in the state of Florida, so you don't have to pay OOP for it. They could use that extra $10 per cancellation/no-show to help pay for the nighttime fireworks spectaculars (instead of reducing them) which I'm fairly certain your neighbor's restaurants don't do. But correct me if I'm wrong.

There are only 70+ TS sites at WDW and Disney is simply protecting their investment. I'm not sure I understand why so many people on this thread are still howling at the wind. Disney has done the math and they're clearly willing to lose 2% (yes, 2%, not 20% or more like some of you think) of their customers and their dining habits over this change. So why is anyone still expending their energy complaining about it? Not only will this policy not be overturned, but I'll bet within 18-24 months it will extend to all TS restaurants on property. As for anyone who says they'll take their vacation dollars elsewhere as a result... No, you won't. You'll come back and you'll obey because WDW is one of a kind and no other collection of parks in the world compares, and you know it. And every time you come on these boards it's a win for Disney. It's time you took out of your day to devote to WDW and everything it stands for. See ya real soon!

 

[pinkerbell]

I don't think that is clear at all. In fact, I think it is far more probable that it is Disney's tolerance for such costs of doing business that has changed, rather than a matter of guest behaviour changing significantly enough for those costs to rise.

the additional charges across the board are very unattrative to many people. Getting cahrged serveral different room rates in one stay is nuts, paying more for the same food because you eat it on a different day than someone else is insulting and now beiing charged for not cancelling w/in 24hrs (and it's the 24 hrs that hits a nerve as unresaonable) is more than my back can bear. We are already booked for April, we have ! ressies we may not make depending on a flight and once that is finalized, we will cancel it (out of 15 ressies) I highly doubt many newbies are even aware of th 180 out to book and feel this policy, like any, may have some small amount of abuse, but not enough to justify the end result.
If Disney is taking drastic steps such as these (and yes, it is drastic for a faimly of ANY size to pay out money for nothing if a child falls ill or if someone is exhausated and cannot make a ressie (risking further health issues if they continue) then they are truly missing the mark. Punishing everyone for the mistakes of a few is never a wise choice.

 

[TDC Nala]

Disney's trying to ADJUST guest behavior. Instead of just not showing up for that ADR you will now have to cancel it. Instead of thinking "oh, I'd rather ride Splash Mountain again than go to Chef Mickeys" you now have to decide if it's worth money to you.

I suppose it could backfire and result in a drastic downturn of business at the affected restaurants but somehow I don't think so. If you bought a DDP you are still going to want character meals. If you're not into character meals you are probably into signatures.

The Metro system around here put in a peak of the peak fare to try and nudge Metro riders into changing the hours they ride the trains. But nobody changed anything (mostly because a lot of commuters are riding on employer subsidies and are not paying the higher fares themselves). So either this will work and guests will change the way they've been looking at dining at these particular restaurants, or they won't.

I know we've got 63 pages here about whether guests like the change or not, but it doesn't matter. Nobody likes having to pay more - but there it is.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

I understand what you're saying about "goodwill" and the "cost of doing business", and that is how they had been operating all along. But clearly, that "cost of doing business" is getting too expensive because of the abusive (in the case of the hoarders) or apathetic (in most other cases) behavior of their customers. It's the old "give an inch and they'll take a yard" scenario. And it's not just the hoarders IMO. This thread is full of people essentially saying they felt little or no level of committment to show up at the ADRs they chose to make as they blew them off for a variety of reasons - some valid, but most... not so much.

It seems, in most cases (not all), those who are the most upset are the same ones who cancelled for not so valid reasons. Rather than being upset with Disney, they should realize they brought this on themselves & everyone else. This thread is very enlightening, & in many cases quite transparent.

I don't think that is clear at all. In fact, I think it is far more probable that it is Disney's tolerance for such costs of doing business that has changed, rather than a matter of guest behaviour changing significantly enough for those costs to rise.

It's also quite possible they realize they no longer need to accept a "cost of doing business". Most of their guests are a captive audience. That's not true for most hotels. They probably realize that if some will keep their ADRs everyone could. Charging a fee, if they don't, will get them more motivated to do so.

the additional charges across the board are very unattrative to many people. Getting cahrged serveral different room rates in one stay is nuts, paying more for the same food because you eat it on a different day than someone else is insulting and now beiing charged for not cancelling w/in 24hrs (and it's the 24 hrs that hits a nerve as unresaonable) is more than my back can bear. We are already booked for April, we have ! ressies we may not make depending on a flight and once that is finalized, we will cancel it (out of 15 ressies) I highly doubt many newbies are even aware of th 180 out to book and feel this policy, like any, may have some small amount of abuse, but not enough to justify the end result.
If Disney is taking drastic steps such as these (and yes, it is drastic for a faimly of ANY size to pay out money for nothing if a child falls ill or if someone is exhausated and cannot make a ressie (risking further health issues if they continue) then they are truly missing the mark. Punishing everyone for the mistakes of a few is never a wise choice.

Unfortunately, based on the DIS alone there seems to be more than a small amount of abuse, & we're just a minuscule number of WDW guests.

 

[pinkerbell]

That's probably because no other restaurant in the world has anything to do with the #1 tourist destination on planet Earth. Why do people even bother comparing anything in the outside world with WDW? WDW charges $18 for honey sesame chicken at Nine Dragons so they can pay for the diesel fuel in the third largest bus system in the state of Florida, so you don't have to pay OOP for it. They could use that extra $10 per cancellation/no-show to help pay for the nighttime fireworks spectaculars (instead of reducing them) which I'm fairly certain your neighbor's restaurants don't do. But correct me if I'm wrong.

There are only 70+ TS sites at WDW and Disney is simply protecting their investment. I'm not sure I understand why so many people on this thread are still howling at the wind. Disney has done the math and they're clearly willing to lose 2% (yes, 2%, not 20% or more like some of you think) of their customers and their dining habits over this change. So why is anyone still expending their energy complaining about it? Not only will this policy not be overturned, but I'll bet within 18-24 months it will extend to all TS restaurants on property. As for anyone who says they'll take their vacation dollars elsewhere as a result... No, you won't. You'll come back and you'll obey because WDW is one of a kind and no other collection of parks in the world compares, and you know it. And every time you come on these boards it's a win for Disney. It's time you took out of your day to devote to WDW and everything it stands for. See ya real soon!

I put your theory to the test about people not going back and it being a one of a kind experience. I asked DD5 whihc she prefers Six Flags or WDW. she said.... hmmmm, I can't tell, so I then asked my 8 yr old, SHe said Disney, then I asked DIsney or Cape Cod and as in the past she picked the Cape. Then teh 5 yo piped up and said SIX FLAGS, but also chose the cape over both.
So we go to disney at least once a year, we go to the cape twice and six flags regulalry. While you may think everyone will bow to Disney, I for one, will not. Like many people, we have options, Good options, closer and less expensive options. And most importantly FLEXIBLE options! We have a large trip booked for April (all of us are regular visitors and not feeling the love) which may very well be our last. And to think I almost bought into the DVC thing... so glad now I didn't I don't like where this is going, and know many others think the same. If having too many people in the parks causes price increases, I can't wait to asee what willhappen if attendance lowers

 

[tarheelmjfan]

I put your theory to the test about people not going back and it being a one of a kind experience. I asked DD5 whihc she prefers Six Flags or WDW. she said.... hmmmm, I can't tell, so I then asked my 8 yr old, SHe said Disney, then I asked DIsney or Cape Cod and as in the past she picked the Cape. Then teh 5 yo piped up and said SIX FLAGS, but also chose the cape over both.
So we go to disney at least once a year, we go to the cape twice and six flags regulalry. While you may think everyone will bow to Disney, I for one, will not. Like many people, we have options, Good options, closer and less expensive options. And most importantly FLEXIBLE options! We have a large trip booked for April (all of us are regular visitors and not feeling the love) which may very well be our last. And to think I almost bought into the DVC thing... so glad now I didn't I don't like where this is going, and know many others think the same. If having too many people in the parks causes price increases, I can't wait to asee what willhappen if attendance lowers

There's children born every day, which means new parents & grandparents who want to take their kids/grandkids to WDW. There's also those people who grew up dreaming of going to Disney, & now can as an adult. I don't see them running out of guests any time soon. As much as we'd like to feel irreplaceable, WDW hasn't seemed to put a high value on repeat visitors in a long time. Sadly, I had to learn to accept that years ago. We're all just another paying customer.

 

[kaytieeldr]

the additional charges across the board are very unattrative to many people. Getting cahrged serveral different room rates in one stay is nuts

Actually, it's typical throughout the hotel industry.

and now beiing charged for not cancelling w/in 24hrs (and it's the 24 hrs that hits a nerve as unresaonable)

Snurk71 has confirmed at least a couple of times that it's the day before - until 10 by phone or 11:59 online.

We are already booked for April,

Then this change doesn't affect you. You made your reservations before October 26.

 

[pinkerbell]

Actually, it's typical throughout the hotel industry.
Snurk71 has confirmed at least a couple of times that it's the day before - until 10 by phone or 11:59 online.
Then this change doesn't affect you. You made your reservations before October 26.

As an AP holder (good for another 11 months!) It does

I stated earlier this will probably be our last AP. DDP less desireable for many reasons, Staying on propertly less desireable, etc.
I just received a call from someone who knows I do Disney travel planning for people. I just steered her away from Disney without even trying, she had limited time and needed flexibility. Going to Disney was not going to work for her and due to the timeing of her vacation and needs, she felt better off going elsewhere. Her kids have never been, but to the person who has never been, other places are just as good, and well, Other places have really picked up the ball where Disney has dropped it

Most places do not throw around false statements about being a leader in the industry,well now they all do, and most, sadly are not.
Places fall in and OUT of favor all the time. Just like we as guests are not irreplacable, neither is disney