Priority Seating: It has to change.

[Goofy4WDW1964]

Well said gullyf! The OP did not plan ahead and make PS (or ADR) and then tried to point the finger at everyone else when they had trouble getting a last minute PS. That is like complaining that FP users slow down the stand by line. Duh, that is how it is suppossed to work, not a flaw in the system.

Go back an actually read the original post. Notice the part that indicated that 2 PS were made in advance? I'm not sure, but that might indicate planning.

We have never had trouble getting PS for peak crowd times of year, but we make them 90 days out. It is a big effort to do so, I wake up early many days in a row to get the PS place and time I most want (including CRT) and have always been able to get most if not all of what I wanted.

I notice you didn't indicate that you made multiple PS so I am going to assume that you didn't. The problem occurs when people make multiple PS for the same time. That is what the poster was indicating that needs to be addressed. And yes, no-shows do hold up tables. A name isn't called off the PS list to be seated unless there is an open table. Wouldn't make much sense to call them up to let them know that a table might be ready soon. You have up to 15 minutes before they move on to the next person on the list. So, yes, that empty table sits there for 15 minutes. Now, 15 minutes doesn't seem like very much, but it can build up depending on how many no shows there are.

The OP was assuming the tables were kept empty because of PS no shows. That is really not the case. Most of us know a PS is not a reservation. With a PS you get the next avaliable table but they do not hold tables open waiting for PS people to show up. If they took a cc or turned it into a 'real' reservation it would just make things worse for walk ins.

One suggestion was to require a credit card to make a PS. If that was the only change, then that wouldn't reduce the number of tables available. It would still be a PS but if you don't show, and you don't cancel, then you get charged. I don't know what the perfect charge would be or what the perfect amount of time to give someone to cancel before charging them would be. But, I do agree that Disney does need to implement changes to minimize the multiple PS. Now, I'm not saying this is the answer, it's just an idea. Yes, they do hold tables for PS for a certain length of time before they move on to the next person on the list.

Correcting this doesn't penalize people who make their reservations early. They can still do that.

 

[freakylick]

I have to tell you that if you dont like Jwill you dont have to, but "thug" is far from the term you can use for him. ... He never did any "thug" things. In fact, he was very preppy if anything.

I knew he was friends with Blake (I will always enjoy watching the replays of Blake stealing the ball from JWill as he was "listening" to Coach K ). I refer to him as a "thug" somewhat in jest. But he did have his moments of ...well let's just say, I didn't appreciate when he intentionally chucked a ball at a BC player after the whistle blew. It was seemingly uninstigated, though we never really know what gets said between players on the court.

Back on topic...

Ultimately it is like any other system: it benefits those who know how to use it.

And the biggest benefactors are the ones that abuse it...But that's just my selfish side talking

 

[tlbwriter]

That is silly and not at all the point. Making three PS when you are only going to use one of them is like taking three of something at a buffet when you know you plan to throw away two of what you took. It's selfish and wasteful. I think you can use "common courtsey" and still get to do what is most important to you while on vacation without making it more difficult for others to enjoy themsleves.

Ah, that's a much better analogy than mine. Say there are three cakes on the buffet, and each has 6 slices. You don't know which one you'll feel like eating, so you take a slice of each, knowing full well you're going to throw two of them away. Sure, the people who didn't get that cake could stand at the buffet and hope they bring another one. Or they could settle for something else, instead of their favorite cake. But if you had just used a little common courtesy, you would still get the one piece of cake you were planning to eat, and two other people could have theirs as well. It boggles the mind to see why anyone finds this so disagreeable.

 

[lillygator]

Hey civileng68....thanks for the explanation as well as your school history...

I went to UF (not for engineering) but I lived with an civil engineering student who graduating with a masters - he is into bridge design and whatnot - he headed up the UF team that won the bridge building contest....I typed up many a report for him dealing with sand sifters etc....

 

[gullyf]

How do you come up with that? No one would be telling you how and when you should eat if they limited the number of PSs you made in a day. If you decided you wanted two lunches or two dinners, you'd still be free to eat at any CS restaurant, or to wait in line at a TS restaurant. Sorry, this argument doesn't hold water.

Of course it holds water, by your own statement. You would be saying that if I wanted to have three sit-downs at places that take PS's, I couldn't reserve for them (which very often means no seating, line or otherwise). That is silly. Now, it may be that I shouldn't be able to reserve them all at 5'o clock, but now you are looking at time frames and having to track that and decide what time interval is reasonable between meals. All in all, not a very good way to go. And now, how do you link a reservation to a guest? By ticket? So, five adults could hold 5 different PS's, even though they are going to eat as a group? Ahh, now we need to do biometric scanning at the entrances of all the eateries, too! Get a grip folks, before we turn into a police state that would turn Stalin green with envy...

 

[freakylick]

Common Courtesy is something you sit around and say.. wouldnt it be nice if...

And that's the problem...too many people think that common courtesy is just a bunch of "if's" that you talk about...instead of actually acting on those "if's".

Because all you have to do is go out in public to realize everyone has their own gain in mind.

Everyone does have some level of selfishness in them. But that doesn't justify it.

 

[LuluLovesDisney]

Im so sick of hearing everyone complain about 'common courtesy'

Common Courtesy is something you sit around and say.. wouldnt it be nice if...

Because all you have to do is go out in public to realize everyone has their own gain in mind.

And i honestly cant beleive that when anyone plans their Disney vacation theyre planning it according to all the families who are there, and how fair they are to them. If you plan your whole trip worrying about "common courtesy" you wouldnt even enter a park, because what if on my third day of MK, the park fills to capacity, and then thats many families that wont get in, and what if its their first trip to disney, and I just ruined it? Because we need to have 'common courtesy'

Thats far-fetched. I know. But its where this is leading. God forbid you inconvience somone else.

I see the problem! You don't understand what common courtesy actually *is*. It is not inconveniencing *yourself* to the benefit of others. Within the confines of common courtesy, you can still make PS's, enter parks, etc. without putting yourself last. It simply means you do *not* do it at the expense of others. You play *fairly*.

Common courtesy means we all deserve a chance, we all deserve respect. It does not demand me to *give up* my chance, it demands I do not compromise the chances of others.

Common courtesy doesn't mean you plan your vacation letting everyone go in front of you on line, but it does demand you don't cut in front of others.

I truly believe most people (but certainly not all) are concerned about common courtesy during their vacation, in line at the supermarket, driving, etc. because that is where we need it the most. It's something you do all the time.

Originally posted by Leighe (can't get the quote thing to work here ) That is silly and not at all the point. Making three PS when you are only going to use one of them is like taking three of something at a buffet when you know you plan to throw away two of what you took. It's selfish and wasteful. I think you can use "common courtsey" and still get to do what is most important to you while on vacation without making it more difficult for others to enjoy themsleves.

Very well said!!

Also
Originally posted by TLBwriter
A better one would be if one were able to reserve a spot in the park, and there were a limited number of spots available each day, and you reserved MK, AK, and MGM because you just couldn't decide ahead of time which one you would want to use. See, the problem is not that you're reserving something you want to use. No one has an issue with that. The problem is that you're reserving something without having any intention of using it yourself, and your reservation is keeping someone else from having it. And at the same time you're telling us it's unnecessary to worry about being able to get these reservations. While you have three of them in your pocket to make sure you get to use whatever happens to strike your fancy that day.

See? Common courtesy is designed to benefit everyone, no one person or group in particular. It just means treating others fairly.

 

[tlbwriter]

Of course it holds water, by your own statement. You would be saying that if I wanted to have three sit-downs at places that take PS's, I couldn't reserve for them (which very often means no seating, line or otherwise).

Nope, sorry, still doesn't hold water. You're getting into a ridiculous straw man argument. Yes, theoretically, someone might want three TS dinners in one night. But how often does that happen? How many people would be affected? On the other hand, how many people are affected by the inability to get a PS because people have taken them without planning to use them? It would be interesting to see which of these factors would involve the greatest number of people. Because you can't make everyone happy... sometimes you have to go with the greatest good for the greatest number. One person doesn't get all the PSs he/she wants to hoard, but two or three other parties get them who wouldn't otherwise have been able to.

That is silly. Now, it may be that I shouldn't be able to reserve them all at 5'o clock, but now you are looking at time frames and having to track that and decide what time interval is reasonable between meals. All in all, not a very good way to go.

Works for Fast Pass! Actually, that's not a bad idea... let people make Fast Pass PSs as a compromise between 90-day planning and spur-of-the-minute standing in line.

Get a grip folks, before we turn into a police state that would turn Stalin green with envy...

Oh, puh-leeze... out comes poor Stalin, any time we can't think of anything else to justify doing whatever the heck we want to do. Why stop with Stalin? Why not Hitler? Saving him for the big finish?

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Everyone does have some level of selfishness in them. But that doesn't justify it.

And the key is not everyone makes the conscious choice to act out of selfishness. Most people say, "Gee, I will make only 1 ADR (PS) for dinner, not three." Most people, if they know their plans have changed will act courteously, make a phone call and cancel their ADR (PS).

Most people will make the choice to act courteously and out of consideration for others, suppressing the selfish desire to think of "Me First."

 

[tlbwriter]

I see the problem! You don't understand what common courtesy actually *is*. It is not inconveniencing *yourself* to the benefit of others. Within the confines of common courtesy, you can still make PS's, enter parks, etc. without putting yourself last. It simply means you do *not* do it at the expense of others. You play *fairly*.

Common courtesy means we all deserve a chance, we all deserve respect. It does not demand me to *give up* my chance, it demands I do not compromise the chances of others.

Common courtesy doesn't mean you plan your vacation letting everyone go in front of you on line, but it does demand you don't cut in front of others.

Excellent, Lulu. That's exactly it.

 

[gullyf]

Originally posted by Leighe (can't get the quote thing to work here ) That is silly and not at all the point. Making three PS when you are only going to use one of them is like taking three of something at a buffet when you know you plan to throw away two of what you took. It's selfish and wasteful. I think you can use "common courtsey" and still get to do what is most important to you while on vacation without making it more difficult for others to enjoy themsleves.

Very well said!!

(Disclaimer: EVERYTHING I have seen on this thread is *assumption*, my posts included! It may or may not coincide with reality!)
The real problem is that you are confusing a PS with a physical table, which it *almost* certainly is not! It is a *most likely* statisical representation, a "virtual" table, and it is already figured out that a certain number of PS's will not show! Thus, you are taking nothing and nothing is going unused! It is entirely possible for an eatery with 20 actual tables to allow 40 PS's, because historically they know that only 50% show up. If a few more show up, there is a small wait, if a few less, they take walk-ins. *IT IS FIGURED INTO THE SYSTEM, AND IS EXPECTED!* Maybe not to the extent it currently happening, but either way if they review the figures the system is self-adjusting over a period of time! Only short term "swings" could have a possible effect, not what people do as a general rule.

Courtesy is besides the point here, because *presumably* the system accomodates unused seatings.. it just deletes them.. the virtual table disappears... if my *assumptions* are correct, it could actually be quite elegant in its function...

 

[grimley1968]

Oh, puh-leeze... out comes poor Stalin, any time we can't think of anything else to justify doing whatever the heck we want to do. Why stop with Stalin? Why not Hitler? Saving him for the big finish?

Good one!

So, Disney requiring CC holds in return for actually reserving tables (not PS's but actual table ressies) would be tantamount to Stalin's gulags? Come on.

I wouldn't even equate such an experience with being a Kentucky fan trapped in Cameron Indoor Stadium with all those "crazies"!

 

[tlbwriter]

Thus, you are taking nothing and nothing is going unused!

What you are taking is someone else's ability to make a PS. Yes, someone will probably end up getting that table. But someone who wanted to make a PS for that time slot does not have the opportunity.

 

[OntFamily]

The system is being HEAVILY abused.

Just because no more PS were available, doesn't mean the system is heavily abused. As other posters have mentioned, it could be that the restaurant was not planning on serving at the other tables.

The only way to tell for sure would be if you knew how many people didn't show for their reservation (empty tables are not necessarily no shows).

I'd bet that since people were waiting to enter, the restaurant was operating at labour capacity, as opposed to physical capacity.

We've seen many posts where people have complained about not being able to walk up to a restaurant (so they obviously weren't making PS's). While some people may be double booking (probably the same types who double book hotel rooms), I doubt the problem is widespread.

 

[greenyskp]

Not in my world. How very sad for you.

Why would you post that?

Im sorry that i have a grip on reality, and know who is out there.

Once you remove the rose colored glasses, you realize it can be a harsh world out there. There are lots of kind generous people out there. But there are also people would take advantage of you in a second.

You are implying that Im that kind of person because I use a system that has been set up to accommodate you for any situation. Its not about whether i want mexican food or italian. I know that we'll have dinner at CRT one night. I dont know however, if were going to be in Epcot or MGM the following night. Its amazing to have the freedom to book a restaurant in each park, and know that right now its taken care of, and i wont have to worry about it in december.

Planning a Disney trip is supposed to be fun. Not make you belittle other DIS'ers for their WDW resort choices.

Its MY perogative to book 1, 3, or 27 places if I want. 27 IS out of line and NO ONE does that. But people do book Tonys at MK, Sci Fi At MGM and Alfredos at Epcot, all in one day. EVERYONE who I know that knows anything about planning does this. And Aside from the 12 people on this thread. Ive never heard anyone else complaining.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Courtesy is besides the point here, because *presumably* the system accomodates unused seatings.. it just deletes them.. the virtual table disappears... if my *assumptions* are correct, it could actually be quite elegant in its function...

Sorry, but I have to disagree. Courtesy is the main point here. As tlbwriter pointed out, it's not very likely that someone is going to eat two or three Disney dinners in one evening. I love to eat, but I'm fairly certain that part-way into meal #2 I'd be and by dessert on #2, I'd probably .

There is no rationalization possible for making multiple ADRs for a single meal. The courteous approach is to make a single ADR for the restaurant you plan to dine at, then if your plans change, you call and try to change. If you can't, you stick with your original ADR or go to a counter service for the meal.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Its MY perogative to book 1, 3, or 27 places if I want.

And it's your fellow DISers perogative to call you on the carpet for being selfish by booking multiple ADRs for a single meal.

27 IS out of line and NO ONE does that. But people do book Tonys at MK, Sci Fi At MGM and Alfredos at Epcot, all in one day.

You know this for a fact or is this simply your conjecture in an attempt to generate support for a very selfish action?

EVERYONE who I know that knows anything about planning does this.

I know a lot about Disney planning and I've never done this. Until this thread, I didn't know that there were people who would knowingly and willingly abuse the system like this. That is sad on so many levels.

And Aside from the 12 people on this thread. Ive never heard anyone else complaining.

Make that 13 people now.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

Of course it holds water, by your own statement. You would be saying that if I wanted to have three sit-downs at places that take PS's, I couldn't reserve for them (which very often means no seating, line or otherwise). That is silly. Now, it may be that I shouldn't be able to reserve them all at 5'o clock, but now you are looking at time frames and having to track that and decide what time interval is reasonable between meals. All in all, not a very good way to go. And now, how do you link a reservation to a guest? By ticket? So, five adults could hold 5 different PS's, even though they are going to eat as a group? Ahh, now we need to do biometric scanning at the entrances of all the eateries, too! Get a grip folks, before we turn into a police state that would turn Stalin green with envy...

How would a deposit that becomes non refundable 48 hours before your scheduled time stop you from legitimately eating 3 sit downs say at 10, 12, and 2 as you suggest? If indeed you truly want that scenario then it should be no trouble to show Disney you mean business by putting the money on the table so to speak.
And police state? How would calling you and requiring you to delete one of two ressies they know you couldn't possibly make both such as CP for noon and Boma for 12:05 be a police state? Furthermore, if you've got the deposit down, they probably won't need anything else.
Furthermore,
1. Disney isn't "the state" and
2. I see nothing police state about a deposit or a nice CM letting you know you can't possibly make both. If indeed you did want back to back meals, would you take the CM doing you a favor and telling you you can't possibly make both and saving you a deposit loss in the process as a police state?


.

 

[Kaycee]

OK, I think we've exhausted this topic and the insults are starting to fly. This thread is closed.