Rider Switch changing (Started June 16th)

[DGsAtBLT]

So that means that those with toddlers in tow are allowed to have this huge sense of entitlement??! I am aware of the “obvious” way that Disney is trying to be accommodating. What I am not aware of is why people who have a two year old in tow think they are entitled to more than a family with preteens, or no children at all?! My point stands, the sense of entitlement is egregious.

Hey, you asked why Disney should have to deal with it. And the general public, really? How is the general public dealing with anything? What kind of an impact do you think all of this has on theme park guests?

I can’t believe the handwringing that has gone on here over a program designed to help people with small children navigate a Disney park.

 

[LongLiveRafiki]

This whole topic annoys me. You don’t have to go to WDW until all your children are old enough or tall to go on the rides. YOU, the adult, are making this choice to go. Why should Disney, or the general public, have to deal with this??! When I have children in my party, I don’t expect any extras. I know what I’m dealing with and it’s STILL my choice. The sense of entitlement here is outrageous.

I can't speak for everyone, but I don't expect anything extra. If Disney offers something for me to use then I will use it. If they didn't have RS at all, I would then make the choice on whether or not going on the trip would work for my family.

So that means that those with toddlers in tow are allowed to have this huge sense of entitlement??! I am aware of the “obvious” way that Disney is trying to be accommodating. What I am not aware of is why people who have a two year old in tow think they are entitled to more than a family with preteens, or no children at all?! My point stands, the sense of entitlement is egregious.

How is anyone being entitled? No one here is saying Disney is horrible and anti-family because of these changes. We are simply discussing them and how they will play out and affect us. How has anyone on here indicated that we are more entitled to anyone?

It’s not that it doesn’t “jive with my viewpoint on it”. It’s that the overall sense of entitlement because one has a child is downright rude. I’m not mad at anyone for using it. I find it incredulous that anyone is getting upset at changes to the policy. If a family with a two year old is making the choice to go, then the adults switch off and ride every other ride. I’ve done it. If you can’t be grateful - yes, grateful, for the provisions that Disney has put into place to be accommodating to allow both adults the chance to experience a ride then perhaps you ought not go.

People can react to changes without being entitled or feeling ungrateful. I'm sure all of us are grateful that Disney has a RS program at all as it is beneficial to us. At the same time, when people try to indicate that we can fit more rides in less time due to having a kid or that we are breaking some sort of rules by how we use RS (not talking about those who sold RS on eBay or asking for RS without having an eligible child), then we are going toexplain how neither of those things are true

 

[JimmyBean42]

Up to and including letting those under 3 in for free.

Like literally every other water, theme and amusement park in the country.

Shockingly enough, Sesame Place in Pennsylvania you have to pay for children 2 and older, not 3. And if you don't purchase ahead of time, that's $70 at the gate for a 2 year old! Storybookland in NJ and Dutch Wonderland in PA also charge at 2 years old. There are a few others but the names are escaping me. Most don't though and really shouldn't. I think the best thing WDW does for kids under 3 is not charge at buffets. I would have done way less character meals if I had to pay $45 to watch my then 2 year old eat 2 chicken nuggets, a few string beans and a roll.

 

[OSUZorba]

This whole topic annoys me. You don’t have to go to WDW until all your children are old enough or tall to go on the rides. YOU, the adult, are making this choice to go. Why should Disney, or the general public, have to deal with this??! When I have children in my party, I don’t expect any extras. I know what I’m dealing with and it’s STILL my choice. The sense of entitlement here is outrageous.

Once again, Disney and their shareholders like the families' money. They do not do this out of the goodness of their heart, they do it because young families is their prime demographic. Remove all young families from the parks, and the parks would make substantially less money.

And every single major theme/amusement park in the country offers some from of rider swap.

 

[OSUZorba]

It’s not that it doesn’t “jive with my viewpoint on it”. It’s that the overall sense of entitlement because one has a child is downright rude. I’m not mad at anyone for using it. I find it incredulous that anyone is getting upset at changes to the policy. If a family with a two year old is making the choice to go, then the adults switch off and ride every other ride. I’ve done it. If you can’t be grateful - yes, grateful, for the provisions that Disney has put into place to be accommodating to allow both adults the chance to experience a ride then perhaps you ought not go.

There are parks that are more geared towards adult demographics, perhaps you should try them out. Although, just a warning, they will have rider swap too. I don't understand people that go to Disney World, then complain about kids and strollers. It's like going to Cedar Point and complaining that all the roller coasters are loud.

 

[OSUZorba]

Shockingly enough, Sesame Place in Pennsylvania you have to pay for children 2 and older, not 3. And if you don't purchase ahead of time, that's $70 at the gate for a 2 year old! Storybookland in NJ and Dutch Wonderland in PA also charge at 2 years old. There are a few others but the names are escaping me. Most don't though and really shouldn't. I think the best thing WDW does for kids under 3 is not charge at buffets. I would have done way less character meals if I had to pay $45 to watch my then 2 year old eat 2 chicken nuggets, a few string beans and a roll.

Yeah, 2-3 is probably the target demographic for Sesame Place. I agree about buffets, that seems to be fairly standard everywhere for buffets, but it is definitely surprising and very nice that Disney does. Too bad I still have trouble paying $50pp for DW and I, I have no idea how families of 6 do it.

 

[mom2rtk]

Shockingly enough, Sesame Place in Pennsylvania you have to pay for children 2 and older, not 3. And if you don't purchase ahead of time, that's $70 at the gate for a 2 year old! Storybookland in NJ and Dutch Wonderland in PA also charge at 2 years old. There are a few others but the names are escaping me. Most don't though and really shouldn't. I think the best thing WDW does for kids under 3 is not charge at buffets. I would have done way less character meals if I had to pay $45 to watch my then 2 year old eat 2 chicken nuggets, a few string beans and a roll.

My only point is that Disney does offer a very nice benefit for families dealing with these little FP generators. I mean children.

 

[mom2rtk]

Pirates at DLR is getting Fastpass, so the "no height restriction" rule at DLR no longer applies

Aside, I did try out MaxPass. I liked it. If I was going for several days I probably wouldn't get it for every day, but it was super convenient. I do wish the Wi-Fi was better. It was like before WDW made the major improvements to accommodate MDX use in the parks.

I'm actually quite a fan of FP at DLR. I don't even mind that they've added it to a few more rides. With every new one though, I get a bit twitchy since I really don't want them going the rabbit hole of putting on everything possible. But I knew they would have to add more when they added MaxPass. You can't sell a system that runs out of inventory routinely.

And I'm with you on the Wi-Fi. Just ridiculous to have only "hot spots" when you're selling an online system.

Still, on balance, I love the system, in spite of having to pay for it. In reality, that's part of what keeps it usable (because it's not overwhelmed). I think SWL could break it though.

And since I'm on the subject of DLR at the moment - I wouldn't ascribe anything about how things work at DLR to intent or future at WDW. DLR was forced kicking and screaming into Fastpass in the first place...what works there does not easily apply to WDW.

No doubt. The prebooking and tiering at WDW make their needs very different from those at DLR. That's why the DLR change to digital RS there was close to a non-issue. There was some discussion, but definitely not a 40 page thread. The truth is nobody cares what anybody else is getting as long as they can get it themselves in a different way (like access to more than one tier 1 attraction per day). Just not an issue at DLR. Stay tuned when SWL opens though. That's when all bets are off.

 

[mikebb]

So that means that those with toddlers in tow are allowed to have this huge sense of entitlement??! I am aware of the “obvious” way that Disney is trying to be accommodating. What I am not aware of is why people who have a two year old in tow think they are entitled to more than a family with preteens, or no children at all?! My point stands, the sense of entitlement is egregious.

I think you're conflating entitlement with an accommodation that Disney has provided as a courtesy for families of small children.

There is no doubt in my mind that SOME people (as evidenced by stories in this thread) take advantage of systems like this and then start feeling entitled to those accommodations. However that does not entirely negate the reason for that accommodation in the first place, as your post seems to suggest. My wife and I have been frequent visitors to WDW for over 15 years now, and when we had DD six years ago did not intend to stop going to the parks, regardless of special treatment. However it was NICE that when we went back to the parks for the first times after having the baby that we were able to use RS and other accommodations (like the Child Care Centers) to continue to enjoy the parks with a feeling that Disney was helping us! Never at any time did we think of "how to maximize (take advantage) of the RS/FP programs.

Accommodations like this really help with the feeling that Disney goes the extra mile for guests, something that people - especially around here - often complain Disney is moving away from. However, like many things, the Internet has gone and ruined it - a Tragedy of the Commons if you will.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

So that means that those with toddlers in tow are allowed to have this huge sense of entitlement??! I am aware of the “obvious” way that Disney is trying to be accommodating. What I am not aware of is why people who have a two year old in tow think they are entitled to more than a family with preteens, or no children at all?! My point stands, the sense of entitlement is egregious.

What sense of entitlement? I think everyone who has kids in this thread has said we can't wait until we no longer need to use RS. Does it make things a bit more convenient for our entire family to get to do some of the things they want? Yeah, it does - but it still makes things take much longer than if we could all ride together

Disney markets itself as a place to bring the entire family, and then they have rides that have height restrictions that limits the ability of some members of the family to ride - I don't think having a RS is a crazy concept given that

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Shockingly enough, Sesame Place in Pennsylvania you have to pay for children 2 and older, not 3. And if you don't purchase ahead of time, that's $70 at the gate for a 2 year old! Storybookland in NJ and Dutch Wonderland in PA also charge at 2 years old. There are a few others but the names are escaping me. Most don't though and really shouldn't. I think the best thing WDW does for kids under 3 is not charge at buffets. I would have done way less character meals if I had to pay $45 to watch my then 2 year old eat 2 chicken nuggets, a few string beans and a roll.

although Disney makes up for it by counting a 10 year old as an adult on the dining plan. Well, at least now that includes an alcoholic beverage, which that 10 year old, of course, cannot legally have

 

[DGsAtBLT]

although Disney makes up for it by counting a 10 year old as an adult on the dining plan. Well, at least now that includes an alcoholic beverage, which that 10 year old, of course, cannot legally have

That’s a good point, actually.

If parents of kids are so entitled, we should use our powers of persuasion to demand they raise the age of a child instead of giving us rider swap! I’ll skip out on some headliners if it means not being charged $$$ for 10 year olds to eat like a bird at a buffet.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

That’s a good point, actually.

If parents of kids are so entitled, we should use our powers of persuasion to demand they raise the age of a child instead of giving us rider swap! I’ll skip out on some headliners if it means not being charged $$$ for 10 year olds to eat like a bird at a buffet.

I do wish they had three tiers for the meal plans / buffet prices. As I get it that a 10 year old very likely eats more than a 4 year old ... but a 16 year old is also going to likely eat a lot more than a 10 year old, etc.

 

[ArwenMarie]

I think 10 is too young, but many kids are eating as much as many adults by age 12. That would be a better age to start the adult food pricing. Not to go off-topic

 

[amcc]

This whole topic annoys me. You don’t have to go to WDW until all your children are old enough or tall to go on the rides. YOU, the adult, are making this choice to go. Why should Disney, or the general public, have to deal with this??! When I have children in my party, I don’t expect any extras. I know what I’m dealing with and it’s STILL my choice. The sense of entitlement here is outrageous.

Disney is a theme park based on fairy tales and cartoon characters, children’s things, whether adults enjoy them or not. There’s no way around that regardless of marketing.

 

[Lee Matthews]

Shockingly enough, Sesame Place in Pennsylvania you have to pay for children 2 and older, not 3. And if you don't purchase ahead of time, that's $70 at the gate for a 2 year old! Storybookland in NJ and Dutch Wonderland in PA also charge at 2 years old. There are a few others but the names are escaping me. Most don't though and really shouldn't. I think the best thing WDW does for kids under 3 is not charge at buffets. I would have done way less character meals if I had to pay $45 to watch my then 2 year old eat 2 chicken nuggets, a few string beans and a roll.

This is the bad Disney fan in me because we dont have kids yet but kids under 3 eating free at buffets is great. What about at regular table service, can they just eat off the parents plates.

Park entry under 3 is free too isn’t it?

 

[LongLiveRafiki]

This is the bad Disney fan in me because we dont have kids yet but kids under 3 eating free at buffets is great. What about at regular table service, can they just eat off the parents plates.

Park entry under 3 is free too isn’t it?

Yes, at regular TS, a kid under 3 can eat from their parent's plate for free. If you want them to have their own food, you have to pay for it. You can be charged for their drink whether buffet or regular TS, but sometimes servers let that one slide.

It is wonderful that buffets don't charge for kids under 3, although that does seem to be a standard practice anywhere. I've never had to pay for a little one at a buffet anywhere or been forced to order a meal for someone if I didn't want to regardless of age anywhere (except for over 3s at buffets and pre-fixe places).

Park entry under 3 is free as well and one child under 3 does not count toward resort room occupancy limits.

 

[Lee Matthews]

Thanks for the reply. It’s something I’ve wanted to know for a while but never got round to asking

 

[JimmyBean42]

This is the bad Disney fan in me because we dont have kids yet but kids under 3 eating free at buffets is great. What about at regular table service, can they just eat off the parents plates.

Park entry under 3 is free too isn’t it?

Yup, they can just eat off your plate. Most restaurants were super nice last trip and gave my DD2 (2) a kids meal. It worked out great at places we went that weren't buffet (Trattoria al Forno breakfast, Mama Melrose, and Tony's. Only one who didn't was T-Rex).

Under 3 absolutely is free.

 

[JimmyBean42]

Yup, they can just eat off your plate. Most restaurants were super nice last trip and gave my DD2 (2) a kids meal. It worked out great at places we went that weren't buffet (Trattoria al Forno breakfast, Mama Melrose, and Tony's. Only one who didn't was T-Rex).

And I know what someone is going to reply next "Even if it was free, you should never give your child a meal from Tony's. That's just cruel". Ha! Hey put us in the minority that has had good experiences at Tony's.