Throwaway room (read post #2041 or #2710 before posting)

[Angel Ariel]

But what if someone is taking advantage of a loophole. Like parking at DTD or a resort to avoid paying a parking fee? This clogs up the system, and would eventually cause disney to charge for parking everywhere.

That would be an accurate analogy of abuse. Just simply using Disney transportation when you are not staying onsite is not abuse, as the post I was responding to implied.

 

[flutterby3744]

That would be an accurate analogy of abuse. Just simply using Disney transportation when you are not staying onsite is not abuse, as the post I was responding to implied.

I should have been more specific in what I was referring too.

My biggest complaint about my DH is he can't read my mind...the nerve!

 

[Angel Ariel]

I should have been more specific in what I was referring too.

My biggest complaint about my DH is he can't read my mind...the nerve!

There is a difference between booking a throwaway room and parking at DTD to go to a park, though. The person who booked the throwaway room paid full price for that room, the same as everyone else. The person parking at DTD to go to a park is doing so to *avoid* paying the parking fee at the park parking lots. The latter is abuse, the former is not.

 

[seenellie81]

I think this is all crazy. Book what you book use it as you want to use it. People have been doing this forever not just with FP+. If you get a great room discount at say POP on a busy week. You want to head over to the beach for the day and spend one night there. You still keep your room at POP because you went to the beach during the week to break your disney week up. Were you wrong because that day you didnt sleep in your room? No its what worked for you. Who cares what people are doing. Worry about yourself and know that you cant always get what you want. I really want to go to BOG never been there. Someone for sure has a reservation that has already been there. They were quicker then i to call and get their reservation. So its my fault. they shouldn't say oh i am sure that other people that haven't been here or people who are slower at calling they should get this slot i wont make my reservation i will leave it for them. If someone is paying and following policy then it is not wrong. I don't believe that anywhere in policy it states that you must sleep there. IMO i think its great for the guests staying at the campground, less people actually using the perks that they offer less crowding. They may be sold out but only have 75% of the amount of people there. If i had the desire to camp, which i don't. I would make sure to call as soon as i could to get a site just knowing that fact. Wow if i stay here the resort is going to be so much less busy because less people are actually sleeping and staying here. I also wonder if you took disney out of the picture and say this is about any other hotel anywhere else. A wedding blocks out say 25% of the rooms for possible guests. The rest of the hotel is sold out. So you cant get a room in that hotel. Are you upset with the wedding that blocked those rooms for maybe people wanting to stay? or the hotel for allowing them to pay to block out those rooms? Just wondering. I sometimes think that people expect disney to cater to them more then other places just because its disney.

 

[doconeill]

That would be an accurate analogy of abuse. Just simply using Disney transportation when you are not staying onsite is not abuse, as the post I was responding to implied.

There has been a long-standing believe by some that bus transportation at WDW was some sort of resort perk, I believe because it is mentioned that as resort guests you were entitled to unlimited use of transportation or something like that - yet it also never said it was exclusive. In fact, I think tickets also had similar language on them at one point.

 

[siskaren]

I think this is all crazy. Book what you book use it as you want to use it. People have been doing this forever not just with FP+. If you get a great room discount at say POP on a busy week. You want to head over to the beach for the day and spend one night there. You still keep your room at POP because you went to the beach during the week to break your disney week up.

That's apples and oranges. In your example, the room isn't being used for one night in the middle of a one week's stay, but is being used for the rest of the week. The idea of a throwaway room is that the room isn't being used at all during the reservation.

 

[katiekomo]

So if someone were to book a throw away campsite is there a day that's better to book than others? I hear that campers (which I am one, but usually in a tent during off-season, so I don't have a problem getting a site) are locked out of a week they want because someone booked a throwaway on a Wednesday. Would it be better to book a Sunday? Friday? Monday? We can debate over and over the ethics of doing it... bottom line is, it's gonna happen- people are going to do it. So can we at least ask them to not choose a Wednesday and give them a better day of the week? One that's less likely to lock campers out of their weeklong vacation?

 

[katiekomo]

Another thought: could someone post that they are looking to get FP+ for a family of 5 on the camping board... Then someone that will be there that week (with a family of 5 or less) agree to add them to the campsite? With non charging privileges? Probably not- I'm sure y'all will know of why that's really not a great option... I'm just trying to find a way that we can all work together on this... :/

 

[seenellie81]

That's apples and oranges. In your example, the room isn't being used for one night in the middle of a one week's stay, but is being used for the rest of the week. The idea of a throwaway room is that the room isn't being used at all during the reservation.

I get what a throwaway room is. Its not apples to oranges. by not staying in that room that one day during the week it limits the amount of available rooms for someone who is not sleeping there. Thats the point. Someone reserves a room or site and does not stay there because they want the perks. Which in turn limits the amount of sites available to people who actually want to sleep there. It doesnt matter if its for one day or one week or one month. The point is it takes up space from people who want to actually stay there. Well the people who wanted to stay there should have booked quicker. If someone is paying for a site it is their business how they use it as long as its within policy. Why do people care so much about where one is sleeping? or what they are doing with something that they paid for? Someone rents a car from one of the rental places, takes the last value car they had. Lets the car sit in the parking lot for the whole trip except for maybe groceries or to dinner. Are you mad that they didnt use it to drive around because maybe you wanted to actually use it and had you been the one to get it you would have drove it to more places then they are. Its not how you use something that you have reserved its that you are using it in a way that works for you and your family. And as i said before who the heck cares what someone else is doing with there reservation? People are so consumed in what others are doing they forget to worry about what they should be doing such as calling in a timely manner to assure that you have the reservation that you want, or researching other options in case the one you want is unavailable. I always have more then one option in mind in case my first choice is not available.

 

[SolitaryPhoenix]

I'm going to preface this by saying I did not read through this entire thread, it seems a little crazy to do that when I really just want to post my opinion of the practice of booking "throwaway" rooms or campsites in order to get resort benefits. I am a camper, and use a tent, so it's quite irritating to me when I try to book a site and there are none available, knowing that it's entirely possible the last one was booked not by a fellow camper, but by someone trying to get around the 'system' because the campsites are the least expensive on-site 'rooms' available. I would never do this, and find it reprehensible that others would.

Obviously, everyone is looking to get these throwaway rooms at the lowest possible price, and clearly those that do this either don't think of or just don't care about the fact that they're taking these rooms and sites from those that may need a less expensive way of staying at Disney. For myself, although I can usually be a little more flexible because I live locally, of course I'd much prefer to get my camping or resort trip in when it works for me and my family, and others might not have that flexibility at all.

I know people are mad about FP+ and the restrictions they feel it's placing on them, and want the extra resort benefits, but it's not right to take rooms and sites away from other people when you're not going to use them. That's my opinion, and you can flame away if you'd like; I'm not going to argue it because I don't feel there's any way for someone to defend booking throwaways.

 

[brownhaired_girl]

So glad it worked out for you Julie! I am still waiting to see if fp+ opens up for offsite by May..
Otherwise throw us in the boat of the unethical , all about me, group. I have no issues paying for a campsite (it truly is no one's business what someone does or doesn't do with the room). Disney changed the game, Hate the game not the player.

We have been priced out of staying on site with our family, I am paying the same prices to eat , the same prices to walk in the door. But I may or may not get to ride one of my kids favorite headliner rides if I just leave it to chance on the day of. The money that we have invested in this trip.. I want some guarantees. Otherwise we would be taking the kids to Six Flags for the day.

Add me to the list of unethical people. I also booked a campsite. However I did it at 59 days. I have a friend coming with me who will probably only get one trip to Disney. I can remember planning trips with other coworkers and this friend saying "I just want to be a mother". She had fertility issues. Her daughter is now 5 and she is coming to Disney with me. We have been waiting for years. I want her and her daughter to have the best trip they can possibly have. I feel no guilt taking a campsite that is empty at the 59 day mark.

 

[roobug]

I'm going to preface this by saying I did not read through this entire thread, it seems a little crazy to do that when I really just want to post my opinion of the practice of booking "throwaway" rooms or campsites in order to get resort benefits. I am a camper, and use a tent, so it's quite irritating to me when I try to book a site and there are none available, knowing that it's entirely possible the last one was booked not by a fellow camper, but by someone trying to get around the 'system' because the campsites are the least expensive on-site 'rooms' available. I would never do this, and find it reprehensible that others would.

Obviously, everyone is looking to get these throwaway rooms at the lowest possible price, and clearly those that do this either don't think of or just don't care about the fact that they're taking these rooms and sites from those that may need a less expensive way of staying at Disney. For myself, although I can usually be a little more flexible because I live locally, of course I'd much prefer to get my camping or resort trip in when it works for me and my family, and others might not have that flexibility at all.

I know people are mad about FP+ and the restrictions they feel it's placing on them, and want the extra resort benefits, but it's not right to take rooms and sites away from other people when you're not going to use them. That's my opinion, and you can flame away if you'd like; I'm not going to argue it because I don't feel there's any way for someone to defend booking throwaways.

I feel here is nothing to defend about booking a throwaway room. It's not illegal or immoral or anything so why get so angry about it? You have the same ability to book the campsite as someone who is going to pay for it and not use it.

 

[practicallyperfect77]

Add me to the list of unethical people. I also booked a campsite. However I did it at 59 days. I have a friend coming with me who will probably only get one trip to Disney. I can remember planning trips with other coworkers and this friend saying "I just want to be a mother". She had fertility issues. Her daughter is now 5 and she is coming to Disney with me. We have been waiting for years. I want her and her daughter to have the best trip they can possibly have. I feel no guilt taking a campsite that is empty at the 59 day mark.

Add me to the list of unethical people. I see nothing wrong with this at all. As a PP stated, I don't get why others care how others spend their money or time. To me it all boils down to "ya snooze, ya lose", but guess I'm just cold hearted. Wishing you a wonderful time with your friend and her daughter!

 

[Tuffcookie]

I'm going to preface this by saying I did not read through this entire thread, it seems a little crazy to do that when I really just want to post my opinion of the practice of booking "throwaway" rooms or campsites in order to get resort benefits. I am a camper, and use a tent, so it's quite irritating to me when I try to book a site and there are none available, knowing that it's entirely possible the last one was booked not by a fellow camper, but by someone trying to get around the 'system' because the campsites are the least expensive on-site 'rooms' available. I would never do this, and find it reprehensible that others would.

Obviously, everyone is looking to get these throwaway rooms at the lowest possible price, and clearly those that do this either don't think of or just don't care about the fact that they're taking these rooms and sites from those that may need a less expensive way of staying at Disney. For myself, although I can usually be a little more flexible because I live locally, of course I'd much prefer to get my camping or resort trip in when it works for me and my family, and others might not have that flexibility at all.

I know people are mad about FP+ and the restrictions they feel it's placing on them, and want the extra resort benefits, but it's not right to take rooms and sites away from other people when you're not going to use them. That's my opinion, and you can flame away if you'd like; I'm not going to argue it because I don't feel there's any way for someone to defend booking throwaways.

I do not live locally. I booked my air fare and room at The Swan, before the full roll out of FP+. If I could have cancelled and changed to another date, without paying a hefty penalty, I would have.

You said you do not want to argue but if a camper has not made a reservation by 60 days away, I do not feel guilty reserving it at that point. And for the record, I have camped in a tent at FW a couple of times. I always made my reservation 9-12 months in advance.

TC

 

[SolitaryPhoenix]

So apparently you all think if the rooms aren't taken at 60 days out, tough luck, survival of the fittest? That's a very cold, cold way to look at this. Again, not going to argue or get into some silly flame war over this, just saying, I view that as a really selfish, unsympathetic way to view visiting Disney, at least as far as potentially making someone else's life more difficult. Whatever, not worth more time. Pretty sad; so much for pixie dust...

 

[morethananyonex]

So apparently you all think if the rooms aren't taken at 60 days out, tough luck, survival of the fittest? That's a very cold, cold way to look at this. Again, not going to argue or get into some silly flame war over this, just saying, I view that as a really selfish, unsympathetic way to view visiting Disney, at least as far as potentially making someone else's life more difficult. Whatever, not worth more time. Pretty sad; so much for pixie dust...

If you are a person who attempts to book a campsite and is told it is full, does it make you any less disappointed to find out every single person is an actual camper? Why does it make a difference? You still can't go. Full is full.

I mean, people can get all high and mighty about this if they want to. Point remains that people doing this are not breaking any rules.

 

[seenellie81]

So apparently you all think if the rooms aren't taken at 60 days out, tough luck, survival of the fittest? That's a very cold, cold way to look at this. Again, not going to argue or get into some silly flame war over this, just saying, I view that as a really selfish, unsympathetic way to view visiting Disney, at least as far as potentially making someone else's life more difficult. Whatever, not worth more time. Pretty sad; so much for pixie dust...

What am i not understanding?? What is wrong with planning, calling or going online reserving, and paying for a campsite? Who cares what the person does or doesn't do with the campsite? Would it make you felt better if they slept there? I feel better knowing that there are going to be less people actually at the resort and that the resort pool, dining, transportation etc are going to be less busy. Again why is it my business where someone sleeps??

 

[Brian Noble]

I view that as a really selfish, unsympathetic way to view visiting Disney

So, is it selfish if I book a room at BC/YC/BCV, but never use Stormalong Bay? After all, only guests at those three resorts get to use that pool.

And, truth be told, the last time I stayed at BCV, I did not go into Stormalong Bay even once. I guess I'm just selfish and unsympathetic for occupying that room when some other family that really wanted that pool would have taken it in a heartbeat. And, yes, the resort was full---this was during Food & Wine---so I really was taking the spot that someone else would have wanted.

 

[oldguy51]

I do not think this issue will go away soon. So what are your thoughts on how to solve this issue? If you look at numbers Disney probably averages @90,000 people a day during the summer. Imagine that many people making fast pass selections over a 60 day period. 90,000 times 60 days, times 3 fast passes. Wow! and that is not even counting fast pass changes! And consider that some off us will be making fast pass changes the day of simply due to weather! As someone who stays off Disney I am jealous over the fast pass reservations that resort people make, however I understand the issues. Disney can use someone's resort reservation as a gateway to allow access for a certain period of time based on the reservation and number of days on the ticket. How can Disney manage that for those of us off the resort. Would we be willing to accept the idea that once we schedule fast pass plus during a day using our ticket we will not be able to switch the day and must use the ticket in that park on that day? Otherwise holding a 8 day Disney park hopper ticket could have someone making fast pass plus reservation and changing it every day until they finally visit. Do we not think that Disney may charge us for this service like Universal does for its front of line program? If they do charge per person how quickly will it equal the cost of a room, at which point we all will be at Disney? If you are a family of 4 and Disney charges lets say $20 per day for ticket service at certain times of the year the budget resorts would be cheaper, however their rooms are very small. At this point would it be OK to book the Disney room and stay off site for a room actually big enough for your family to be comfortable? Do you think this issue may lead Disney to do minimum length of stays at resorts like many beach hotels do during the busy summer months? For example you must stay for at least the length of your tickets? That would solve the one day reservation issue. I will be interested to read anyone's ideas.........

 

[morethananyonex]

I do not think this issue will go away soon. So what are your thoughts on how to solve this issue? If you look at numbers Disney probably averages @90,000 people a day during the summer. Imagine that many people making fast pass selections over a 60 day period. 90,000 times 60 days, times 3 fast passes. Wow! and that is not even counting fast pass changes! And consider that some off us will be making fast pass changes the day of simply due to weather! As someone who stays off Disney I am jealous over the fast pass reservations that resort people make, however I understand the issues. Disney can use someone's resort reservation as a gateway to allow access for a certain period of time based on the reservation and number of days on the ticket. How can Disney manage that for those of us off the resort. Would we be willing to accept the idea that once we schedule fast pass plus during a day using our ticket we will not be able to switch the day and must use the ticket in that park on that day? Otherwise holding a 8 day Disney park hopper ticket could have someone making fast pass plus reservation and changing it every day until they finally visit. Do we not think that Disney may charge us for this service like Universal does for its front of line program? If they do charge per person how quickly will it equal the cost of a room, at which point we all will be at Disney? If you are a family of 4 and Disney charges lets say $20 per day for ticket service at certain times of the year the budget resorts would be cheaper, however their rooms are very small. At this point would it be OK to book the Disney room and stay off site for a room actually big enough for your family to be comfortable? Do you think this issue may lead Disney to do minimum length of stays at resorts like many beach hotels do during the busy summer months? For example you must stay for at least the length of your tickets? That would solve the one day reservation issue. I will be interested to read anyone's ideas.........

This issue is going to go away very soon. Disney has begun larger tests of FP+ in advance for offsite guests. They had been testing since January, but there have been many reports recently of offsite guests getting prebooking before they leave home.