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

[horse11]

Campgrounds are limited to 10 people.

Yes, they still get to keep them. At least for now. The system seems to be filled with loopholes.

I don't quite understand your explanation on stopping it. If they choose to "fix" it, my guess is they'd just stop shipping them out and make people start picking them up at the resort or in the parks.

What I explained would only work if they choose to cancel. Unfortunitly people may still choose to spend the extra cash and not cancel and would still be willing to check in to get there MB. It may at least lower the amount of people that choose to do it when they are held accountable financially. Wow 10 is way too much to allow at one camp site IMOP.

 

[cakebaker]

Iger said it several years ago. Doesn't seem to have changed much though...

Discounts aren't near as good as they used to be. They tightened up on the way discounts work in regards to the expiration date- you used to could book starting the last available day for a discount and have it run through your entire trip- we did that at Christmas once.

As far as I can tell, they've removed any discounts for Christmas- again, our Christmas trip included Christmas day at a discount.

So I think there's fewer, but no, they have not yet been able to eliminate them. I have hope.

 

[Luckybee]

You are absolutely correct, it is only in my mind. My posts are entirely my own opinion (also, I do not nor have I ever worked for The Walt Disney Company or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates) and I do feel that it is largely unfair to folks who don't know how to manipulate the system. I also feel its unethical to book throwaway rooms because you don't want to pay retail costs (mainly with regards to Magic Bands and/or lodging) or want to book ADRs & FP+s early for the entirety of your stay to make it more "magical".

Other than annoyance (mainly due to early park closings), I'm perfectly fine with hard ticket and upcharge events and am happy to spend more money if it means less people and a better experience. Heck, make entry $250 a day with no multiday discounts, I'm fine with that. Spending a few more dollars to not wait in line or access more attractions is fine with me.



I think we differ in the fact that I am opposed to advertising a "secret" of booking a single night rooms specifically to receive 4+ magic bands and early access to book 5-7+ days of ADRs and FP+. It doesn't matter where you sleep - stay in your car, put a blanket on the ground in the parking lot, or hide in the Tangled bathrooms for all I care.

Booking a cheap on-site stay for one (1) night just to get early access and entitlements for 4-5-6-7-8 days you would otherwise not be afforded is not cool by me. This is simply gaming the system (so are split stays IMHO with regards to FP+ & ADRs) and maybe someday Disney will crack down, maybe (probably) not. If throwaway rooms are OK by you, then we can just agree to disagree and move on with our lives.

If you want to book a room to be "safe" because you might need to nap or shower or store your luggage or watch your favorite TV show or blow dry your hair, that's totally cool - I get it. I booked a hotel room just so I could use the gym (on my wedding day). I checked in, went straight to the gym, exercised, and left. Best money I ever spent - though it cost about the same as my yearly gym membership.

You're right we'll have to agree to disagree since I see nothing different in what you describe ie: booking a room to use the gym v. the true throwaway concept

 

[cakebaker]

You're right we'll have to agree to disagree since I see nothing different in what you describe ie: booking a room to use the gym v. the true throwaway concept

The throwaway gets you perks that extend beyond your check in-check out day. That's the difference.

 

[Luckybee]

Weird...that is what I have been arguing all along.

Exactly !

 

[snayak]

How do you know that WDW doesn't want to give access to FP for length of ticket to people who book only one night to entice them to spend more in the parks. Unless you know for sure that isn't their plan you cannot really say it is exploiting anything. They block guests from EMH and parking...why wouldn't they block guests from FP booking if that is what they wanted. I still think that this is something bringing them more $$$ and exactly what they intended to happen. I for one would pay for the room for every night I needed it if that is what WDW required, but why pay for more than I need? That is just silly. Like the previous poster stated it only matters what the_hotel_believes!

I don't know WDW's intent, but you don't either.

If they wanted people to spend more in parks why doesn't everybody get unlimited FP+ bookings from their cell phone across parks for whatever date they want? Who knows? Somebody - certainly not me, and probably not you.

We agree on several things, namely:
1. Disney properties do not offer the amenities per dollar as off-site properties, if at all (6 room suite with private pool and hot tub). Don't get me started on charging the same rates at the Polynesian but having half the resort under construction.
2. Early access to ADRs & FP+ make for a better trip

We disagree on one thing - I don't think its cool to book 7 days of FP & ADRs with a 1 night stay and you do. At the present, through either an oversight, neglect, or plain not caring the system allows for this to occur. Whatever, I'm fine with that, I'm just taking the counterpoint to the principle of the matter. In my mind it would me more acceptable to book the camp site for the entirety of the stay, allowing access to all entitlements with no gray area.

 

[Luckybee]

The throwaway gets you perks that extend beyond your check in-check out day. That's the difference.

But that is because Disney...you know...the company whose business policies we're discussing.....has it as part of their business plan !!!

 

[Luckybee]

I don't know WDW's intent, but you don't either.

If they wanted people to spend more in parks why doesn't everybody get unlimited FP+ bookings from their cell phone across parks for whatever date they want? Who knows? Somebody - certainly not me, and probably not you.

We agree on several things, namely:
1. Disney properties do not offer the amenities per dollar as off-site properties, if at all (6 room suite with private pool and hot tub). Don't get me started on charging the same rates at the Polynesian but having half the resort under construction.
2. Early access to ADRs & FP+ make for a better trip

We disagree on one thing - I don't think its cool to book 7 days of FP & ADRs with a 1 night stay and you do. At the present, through either an oversight, neglect, or plain not caring the system allows for this to occur. Whatever, I'm fine with that, I'm just taking the counterpoint to the principle of the matter. In my mind it would me more acceptable to book the camp site for the entirety of the stay, allowing access to all entitlements with no gray area.

How about the correct multiple choice answer is D...none of the above....I think it is obvious that they want this business !!!

 

[nugov2]

The throwaway gets you perks that extend beyond your check in-check out day. That's the difference.

But again, you don't know that isn't what WDW intends to up their profit from guests who stay offsite. While there is no proof either way I do believe WDW is smart enough to not offer the FP beyond the check in/check out day if that is what they wanted. As the pp mentioned on site guests for more than one day still have the advantage over the throwaway guest so there is still a perk for the completely onsite guest. I think someone said it a couple of pages back, but if something official was released by WDW saying this is what they intended would that change the tune of those so against the concept?

 

[cakebaker]

But that is because Disney...you know...the company whose business policies we're discussing.....has it as part of their business plan !!!

Really? Can you put up a link to that business plan?

While I have no inside information, neither does anyone else and I really don't think you have a clue what their business plan is- except for what they publicly state.

One I've read over and over is they're out to keep their guests on site as much as possible. Throwaway rooms goes directly against that.

 

[nugov2]

I don't know WDW's intent, but you don't either.

If they wanted people to spend more in parks why doesn't everybody get unlimited FP+ bookings from their cell phone across parks for whatever date they want? Who knows? Somebody - certainly not me, and probably not you.

We agree on several things, namely:
1. Disney properties do not offer the amenities per dollar as off-site properties, if at all (6 room suite with private pool and hot tub). Don't get me started on charging the same rates at the Polynesian but having half the resort under construction.
2. Early access to ADRs & FP+ make for a better trip

We disagree on one thing - I don't think its cool to book 7 days of FP & ADRs with a 1 night stay and you do. At the present, through either an oversight, neglect, or plain not caring the system allows for this to occur. Whatever, I'm fine with that, I'm just taking the counterpoint to the principle of the matter. In my mind it would me more acceptable to book the camp site for the entirety of the stay, allowing access to all entitlements with no gray area.

True, but when I host a party I don't put Doritos out on the table if I don't intend for guests to eat them. I deny them access to the Doritos and don't put them out at all. I am pretty sure WDW is smart enough to get this concept. They could easily deny the guest access if they wanted to....have I said that once, twice or a hundred times already

I do like this discussion tonight. There is nothing on tv, my older kids are not around, my little guy is asleep and DH is playing poker.

 

[snayak]

True, but when I host a party I don't put Doritos out on the table if I don't intend for guests to eat them. I deny them access to the Doritos and don't put them out at all. I am pretty sure WDW is smart enough to get this concept. They could easily deny the guest access if they wanted to....have I said that once, twice or a hundred times already

I do like this discussion tonight. There is nothing on tv, my older kids are not around, my little guy is asleep and DH is playing poker.

You put them out for the one night (party night)....not for them to put in their bags and take home to eat later. That would be rude!

I agree with the discussion, my DW is out tonight and its raining out, had a couple beers and surfing the forums.

 

[nugov2]

Really? Can you put up a link to that business plan?

While I have no inside information, neither does anyone else and I really don't think you have a clue what their business plan is- except for what they publicly state.

One I've read over and over is they're out to keep their guests on site as much as possible. Throwaway rooms goes directly against that.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. By booking a throwaway room they are getting the off site guest on site much more than they would have without the throwaway room. This is the key guest they are trying to get more money from because they know they will never stay onsite, but still need to squeeze more money from them. I gave an example of why I think it makes sense they want people to do it earlier.
To rehash it: there are now 3 potential guests to WDW..on site, off site and the off site/pay for throwaway room guest.

Guest 1 onsite is easy money for WDW. They need to do nothing to get them to spend more and the amount of money they spend plays no factor in why WDW wants throwaway guests.

Guest 2 off site is tough money for WDW. This guest has everything planned and will most likely not spend any more than preplanned at WDW. WDW is only going to get the typical $1000 that the average off site family spends at WDW.

Guest 3 off site/throwaway has lots of potential extra money. They now have access to great ADR's and FP for length of ticket and now instead of spending the $1000 the typical off site guest spends, they up their spending by 20% and spend 1200 in addition to paying for a room they don't use for one night.

Does this not make sense for WDW for upping their profit? Does it not make sense this is a good business strategy?

 

[nugov2]

You put them out for the one night (party night)....not for them to put in their bags and take home to eat later. That would be rude!

I agree with the discussion, my DW is out tonight and its raining out, had a couple beers and surfing the forums.

Touche

Though in the WDW scenario they are offering up the doggie bags for guests to take the Doritos home for later. They could put them away when the party was over if they didn't want the guests to keep eating them after the party ended, but they aren't. So I am pretty sure that is what they want.

 

[doconeill]

At the present, through either an oversight, neglect, or plain not caring the system allows for this to occur.

You forgot a fourth option, although you mentioned this word earlier. Intent. Although I doubt it was necessarily intended in the initial design, they may intend for it to stay that way. Don't know. I only play a psychic on TV.

Now here's a thought. What IS the intent of MyMagic+? Why are they sinking a couple billion dollars into it? Customer experience? That's a side effect. I don't think anyone would argue against spending that sort of money expanding the parks wouldn't have greatly improved the customer experience.

No, it's about data. Data is money these days. And they will be able to get all sorts of data. What you buy, where you go, how much time you spend at the resorts vs. the parks, etc. etc. They can focus cast members at attractions that have higher number of FP+ selections reserved in advance as they will be needed. They will have REAL data to know what days will be busier at which parks. All to save money by efficiency.

You know how they gather more data? Get more people to use it.

So although the 60 day advantage may currently be a perk to entice guests to stay on site, Disney may not care as much that they didn't use the room or cancel the reservation after getting the bands and FP+, because they are still using them.

The resorts don't really care about FP+ - it doesn't affect them.

The parks don't really care about the rooms - they want people using their MagicBands.

I just think it's funny that they are getting people to spend $13 (or more for the limited edition ones) or be willing to pay for a room just for the "perk" of being a walking data point.

 

[snayak]

Touche

Though in the WDW scenario they are offering up the doggie bags for guests to take the Doritos home for later. They could put them away when the party was over if they didn't want the guests to keep eating them after the party ended, but they aren't. So I am pretty sure that is what they want.

Once I heard a saying: if you only ever have good roommates, it probably means you're the bad roommate. I would wager something similar applies here (not to you in particular, just in general).

You forgot a fourth option, although you mentioned this word earlier. Intent. Although I doubt it was necessarily intended in the initial design, they may intend for it to stay that way. Don't know. I only play a psychic on TV.

I just think it's funny that they are getting people to spend $13 (or more for the limited edition ones) or be willing to pay for a room just for the "perk" of being a walking data point.

No doubt this could be a "happy accident" leading from what could be described as negligent or simple Parks not talking to Hotels which caused a gap.

I want to be certain to decouple Disney's intent from my personal beliefs. Disney is OK with taking your money and letting you do what you want. I, personally, do not think it's cool to take more than you should just because you could.

From a purely economic standpoint booking a throwaway room is a home run, there is no doubt about that whatsoever. So is jumping lines, getting a DAS card without really qualifying, or outright stealing from gift shops (these examples are from threads here at disBoards!).

I agree with you on the data - I'm not entirely sure why folks aren't more protective of their private data. Disney would love for everybody to have magic bands, with long range RFID they can probably track where each and every person is and run some regression analysis on their habits, and then tailor promotions & coupons to them. I get it - my job is data analysis, I just wouldn't pay $13/person for the privilege (or book a throwaway room for them either).

It used to be that staying on-site (and paying the premium) actually afforded some perks, which are now minimized even further by throwaway rooms.

 

[Luckybee]

You forgot a fourth option, although you mentioned this word earlier. Intent. Although I doubt it was necessarily intended in the initial design, they may intend for it to stay that way. Don't know. I only play a psychic on TV.

Now here's a thought. What IS the intent of MyMagic+? Why are they sinking a couple billion dollars into it? Customer experience? That's a side effect. I don't think anyone would argue against spending that sort of money expanding the parks wouldn't have greatly improved the customer experience.

No, it's about data. Data is money these days. And they will be able to get all sorts of data. What you buy, where you go, how much time you spend at the resorts vs. the parks, etc. etc. They can focus cast members at attractions that have higher number of FP+ selections reserved in advance as they will be needed. They will have REAL data to know what days will be busier at which parks. All to save money by efficiency.

You know how they gather more data? Get more people to use it.

So although the 60 day advantage may currently be a perk to entice guests to stay on site, Disney may not care as much that they didn't use the room or cancel the reservation after getting the bands and FP+, because they are still using them.

The resorts don't really care about FP+ - it doesn't affect them.

The parks don't really care about the rooms - they want people using their MagicBands.

I just think it's funny that they are getting people to spend $13 (or more for the limited edition ones) or be willing to pay for a room just for the "perk" of being a walking data point.

Finally something I think that would get Universal( pun intended) agreement on !

 

[Luckybee]

Once I heard a saying: if you only ever have good roommates, it probably means you're the bad roommate. I would wager something similar applies here (not to you in particular, just in general).



No doubt this could be a "happy accident" leading from what could be described as negligent or simple Parks not talking to Hotels which caused a gap.

I want to be certain to decouple Disney's intent from my personal beliefs. Disney is OK with taking your money and letting you do what you want. I, personally, do not think it's cool to take more than you should just because you could.

From a purely economic standpoint booking a throwaway room is a home run, there is no doubt about that whatsoever. So is jumping lines, getting a DAS card without really qualifying, or outright stealing from gift shops (these examples are from threads here at disBoards!).

I agree with you on the data - I'm not entirely sure why folks aren't more protective of their private data. Disney would love for everybody to have magic bands, with long range RFID they can probably track where each and every person is and run some regression analysis on their habits, and then tailor promotions & coupons to them. I get it - my job is data analysis, I just wouldn't pay $13/person for the privilege (or book a throwaway room for them either).

It used to be that staying on-site (and paying the premium) actually afforded some perks, which are now minimized even further by throwaway rooms.

Please tell me that you're not comparing "jumping lines, getting a DAS card without really qualifying, or outright stealing from gift shops" to booking a throwaway room. If you are there is no point to continuing the discussion because while throwaway rooms are acceptable to Disney and are perfectly legimate tools to use, the rest are not and the latter is criminal conduct....OMG

Or are you one of those....you know the I want the perks just for me kinda poster....lol

 

[mrshoffman]

Are there any threads where people are letting campers who don't need the magic bands or FP+ actually use the campsites? We love to camp & have APs & a bunch of magic bands already. However, we can NEVER find a cheap campsite at Disney anymore for just a night or two. We need a travel agent who will pair up AP holders who can't find a cheap campsite with throw away room vacationers. How hard would it be to add my name to the reservation & not allow charging privileges? That would solve lots of problems--campsite wouldn't sit empty & the other party gets all the perks they want!

 

[FINFAN]

Like I said...data collection.

Now, I would have been none to happy with the assertion by the CM, considering you DID use the room...

Yeah, when I filled DH in on the conversations he was kinda ticked...thought she was out of line but like I said, we were beat so I just did an Elsa

I agree it wasn't her place to determine your reasoning for booking a single night stay, but I understand her frustration. There are always legitimate reasons for booking single night stays- we've certainly done it before. But I imagine there's been a dramatic increase since people figured out how they could benefit from it. In the process, it creates other unhappy guests for many reasons- they can't get their room requests or can't book their 10 day vacation because there are single reservations blocking them out- So cm's deal with those too.

But it's not her place to take it on, even if you were booking throwaway. That's up to the higher ups at Disney to stop and while I worry just what they'll do to stop it, I have no doubt if it continues to happen on a large scale basis, they will. This is costing them money and that's the one thing that will make them sit up and pay attention.

Btw- a lot of people who book throwaways do check in for one reason or another.

I don't think I would have noticed her 'tude as much, except the CM at check in for ASMU was the exact opposite, pleasant a could be and no judgements or implications were made (at least not verbally) actually, that CM said we were the easiest check in she had done all day lol. Oh well...loop holes will always exist and people will always find them.