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

[morethananyonex]

I'm curious if people would still be crying about morals if the ones booking the rooms for one night to get FP+ for their whole stay actually were physically in the room for one night.

It's Disney's rule that is allowing people to book FP+ for their whole stay, not anybody else's. It's not a hard policy to change. As of now the ability to book FP+ is tied to how many days of tickets you have on your MDE account. They only require one night at a resort to access the ability.

So, if the guest actually physically stayed in the room to sleep one night are you suddenly okay with it? What's the difference? Would you cry foul if someone legitimately stayed at a Disney hotel for one night but still booked FP+ for their whole trip? That's an issue to take up with Disney. They have designed their system to allow that.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Thank you for the morning laugh this is the funniest thing I have read in a long time!!!

So if you check into your room at 8am, but luggage is delayed at the airport so you just head to the park until close...you better be careful. WDW may cancel you room due to inactivity while you are out for the day. I mean you haven't used the key for the entire day/night and you checked in the morning. You must open and close you door so many times during the day or they will think you aren't in there and cancel it

The contract period (and rate) for transient public lodging establishments (terminology from link provided by Laketravis) in Florida is per night, not per day. The provider isn't even required to make the unit available until after their published check-in time. So, no, not entering one's room even until 5:59 AM the day following check-in doesn't even apply here .

 

[wordwitt]

I was going to rent a campsite once to take advantage of EMH at MK for the 4th of July a few years ago. Just about got nailed to the wall on these boards for that. Why is this okay? I could care less either way, but just thought it was funny that people would think this was okay, and mine was so bad.

The reason people get irate over that is because there are apparently limited sites, and it is not uncommon for people to be shut out of campsites for capacity. So basically, what they're saying is that the sites are a precious commodity and you're squandering that commodity when someone else could be using it. I think if a commodity is so darned precious, then maybe people ought to be booking earlier.

 

[kaytieeldr]

You can bet that those reserving the "throwaway" rooms are not specifying when reserving that they will not be using those rooms. But in a "bottom line" way.. a sold room is a sold room. So Disney benefits from the situation.

As far as occupancy goes, long as these people are checking in, resorts will show 100% occupancy, empty rooms are factored as sold rooms - because that is what they are. Whether or not someone actually sleeps in the beds..

Its extremely unlikely that any hotel, WDW or not, would be at exactly100% occupancy. Anyone who did pay for a room without staying in it would have prevented someone who actually intended to sleep there from doing so.

 

[Luckybee]

Yes, you were the you I was talking about. In your post I quoted you were comparing this to stealing and violating rules in writing. This is nothing like that.
So if someone pays and stays for 5 days but is in the park for 7 and uses the perks for all 7 is that wrong? Where do you draw the line.

Have you ever signed up for a subscription to get a promotion knowing you will cancel it? Have you ever signed up for a CC to get a perk knowing you will only use it that one time? Have you ever signed up for a free trial knowing you will never continue using it after the first free month? These are all within your rights and you are meeting the terms and conditions, just like those who book a room for one night. Do you know that companies do this with the hope that some of these people will actually become customers? Maybe this is what WDW is hoping? They hope that maybe half of the people booking will stay or use some of the other amenities the hotel offers and that for future trips may actually now want to stay on site. I find it odd that so many think WDW is so dumb that they wouldn't put in writing or close the "loophole" if this was not their intention. That they are not fully aware that people are booking for shorter stays than the park tickets are for. All things they can see just through the computer monitoring system, just like the room entry that they can monitor. As soon as they noticed it they would have changed it, if that was what they really wanted.

To be fair they wouldn't likely get us back as customers onsite. We have done the onsite thing at AKLodge. Although we did enjoy the Lodge because of the animal viewing we were extremely disappointed in the level of service and the quality of accom. at that price point. If i'm spending those dollars I'm staying at the Ritz or a 4 seasons where the quality/service imho is higher. I understand those who want the ambiance of being onsite but the isn't as important to me as a luxury "feel" . Even the Hyatt Grand Cypress had a more luxurious feel to us than did akl. And before anyone suggests the Grand F. we went over for dinner on our last trip and although it was nice it was way too busy/zoo like to get the "feel" im talking about but keep in mind that this is just our tastes.

 

[Laketravis]

I'm curious if people would still be crying about morals if the ones booking the rooms for one night to get FP+ for their whole stay actually were physically in the room for one night.

It's Disney's rule that is allowing people to book FP+ for their whole stay, not anybody else's. It's not a hard policy to change. As of now the ability to book FP+ is tied to how many days of tickets you have on your MDE account. They only require one night at a resort to access the ability.

So, if the guest actually physically stayed in the room to sleep one night are you suddenly okay with it? What's the difference? Would you cry foul if someone legitimately stayed at a Disney hotel for one night but still booked FP+ for their whole trip? That's an issue to take up with Disney. They have designed their system to allow that.

But...but....but..... just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD!

(I know... my repeating that is just as ridiculous as claiming it in the first place).

I think I'll start a cognitive dissonance support group (CDSG). Right after I complete my 5 different Disney Vacation Contest entries for today.

 

[nugov2]

It is amazing to me that people are so priggish and sanctimonious about this whole issue. It just "feels wrong," but no one can explain why it's wrong. That's because it's not. My favorite stretch was the "safety" aspect in case of a fire.

I know so the hotel can do a head count if there is a fire....I guess these posters check into their room and never leave. There are people who book hotel rooms and *gasp* stay out all night having fun and don't get back until 5 or 6 am. How do they count those people....does their room get canceled for violation. I never knew the rules for hotel stays required a minimum number of key swipes, being in the hotel for a head count in the middle of the night if there is a fire. Sometimes people book hotel rooms, but then crash in someone elses room(which could even be a different resort) and that other room is never used

 

[Laketravis]

I know so the hotel can do a head count if there is a fire....I guess these posters check into their room and never leave. There are people who book hotel rooms and *gasp* stay out all night having fun and don't get back until 5 or 6 am. How do they count those people....does their room get canceled for violation. I never knew the rules for hotel stays required a minimum number of key swipes, being in the hotel for a head count in the middle of the night if there is a fire. Sometimes people book hotel rooms, but then crash in someone elses room(which could even be a different resort) and that other room is never used

And I'm betting SOME people have booked a hotel room for an entire night and only used it for an hour.... but we won't even go there

 

[mom2rtk]

Look at it this way. For every body not there because someone booked a throwaway room..... someone else can sneak a 5th person into a 4 person room and not affect the fire department's head count!

 

[nugov2]

To be fair they wouldn't likely get us back as customers onsite. We have done the onsite thing at AKLodge. Although we did enjoy the Lodge because of the animal viewing we were extremely disappointed in the level of service and the quality of accom. at that price point. If i'm spending those dollars I'm staying at the Ritz or a 4 seasons where the quality/service imho is higher. I understand those who want the ambiance of being onsite but the isn't as important to me as a luxury "feel" . Even the Hyatt Grand Cypress had a more luxurious feel to us than did akl. And before anyone suggests the Grand F. we went over for dinner on our last trip and although it was nice it was way too busy/zoo like to get the "feel" im talking about but keep in mind that this is just our tastes.

And I wouldn't either(we share similar views on our standards for our accommodations while on vacation), but I was just pointing out that companies do this with the hopes that some will become new customers. Netflix knows that the majority will use that free subscription who had no intention of ever signing up, but their hope is that the percentage of new customers will outweigh those customers who won't. It obviously does b/c they have offered that for years....like I said none of us knows if this is testing and this is what WDW wants.

 

[Luckybee]

Sometimes people book hotel rooms, but then crash in someone elses room(which could even be a different resort) and that other room is never used

Many moons ago in Nassau before dh and I were dh and dw we did that...but that's not the kind of story I'm going to tell on a Disney board

 

[nugov2]

And I'm betting SOME people have booked a hotel room for an entire night and only used it for an hour.... but we won't even go there

There is the singles board on the dis....we have no idea how many rooms are being booked but left empty from all the dis hookups going back to the nicer resort/room Now there's some Disney magic

 

[Laketravis]

Didn't want to leave this thread out, so here's a reminder I just posted on the "Triple Dipping" thread:

Just a public service reminder for those who feel the OP is "abusing" the current rules at Disney:

Don't forget to make your multiple Disney Vacation Contest entries today using all of those extra email addresses!

(And we know who many of you are based on your previous posts on other threads!)

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming...........

 

[ArwenMarie]

There is the singles board on the dis....we have no idea how many rooms are being booked but left empty from all the dis hookups going back to the nicer resort/room Now there's some Disney magic

I think Disney should start doing bed checks

 

[nugov2]

The contract period (and rate) for transient public lodging establishments (terminology from link provided by Laketravis) in Florida is per night, not per day. The provider isn't even required to make the unit available until after their published check-in time. So, no, not entering one's room even until 5:59 AM the day following check-in doesn't even apply here .

I don't get your point, but I'm only on my first cup of coffee.

Someone posted if you room key isn't swiped they may declare your room vacant and cancel it including all perks, even dining(one n...yay) plans. Even in the scenario that the person checks in at 4 and doesn't go to the room, but straight to the park and runs into a long lost "friend" and then goes out for drinks with them so they do not return to their room until 11am(or whatever WDW checkout time is) the next day, that the room may be gone due to inactivity. This seems so unlikely, I would almost use the term impossible. Who is WDW to tell you how many times is or isn't acceptable for entering your room on your vacation. I have yet to see any official policy on how many times you must enter a room to make the reservation valid.

 

[nugov2]

I think Disney should start doing bed checks

People do think they are becoming too "big brother". Maybe the magic bands work like house arrest ankle devices. They see you enter a off site location while wearing one and..... Tink is waiting to rough you up the next morning when you leave your off site property.

 

[amylevan]

I'm a bit late to the party, but....

We are campers, and its a pain when we go to book and the fort is filled; and more disheartening when we finally snag a space, get there and realize there are empty spots all over.

But IMHO if you pay for a site, its yours, whether you sleep there or not. Disney certainly isn't losing money, you paid for the site, and now you aren't even using their water and electric. Sites are hot commodities, it just means we have to make our reservations as soon as we think we're heading south.

 

[Tramp68]

I seriously can't believe that no one other than Cals_dad sees anything wrong with booking a room or campsite that you're not going to use, which could prevent someone who actually plans on using it from booking it.

If I pay for it, I can choose to use it or not. This is purely Disney's fault for creating a system that encourages this type of behavior. It is no different than Universal. If Universal is going to book the rooms for cheaper than I can buy my family 1 day worth of Express Passes, why wouldn't I book the room and not use it? Not only do I get unlimited express pass, but I also get 1 hour early admission.

By booking a campsite every other day for the length of my stay I am now entitled to:
1. FP+
2. Free parking
3. EMH
4. Disney transportation
5. ADRs
6. Use of FW facilities

For a family of 4 plus 2 friends at $50 for 2 days, I get all of that for $4 per person per day. It is purely a financial decision.

All Disney has to do is offer a package that gives people use of the same amenities for a cheaper price and I will buy that instead....

 

[Tramp68]

As someone who has done some camping at Disney, it is very upsetting to be told that the campsites are all sold out and to then drive thru and see empty sites. Your one night "throwaway" reservation could mean a week of lost reservations. Most people don't go camping for only one night.

And for all those using the "loophole", Disney will catch on soon and just impose more and more restrictions on FPs, MBs, parking, etc, etc. It just takes a few people to ruin it for the rest of the guests. (Free drink refills anyone?)

This is not a loophole. If I rent a car for the week and only drive it 1 day to go off site did I steal the car from someone for the other days?

It is at my disposal once I pay for it to do what I choose.

 

[nugov2]

I'm a bit late to the party, but....

We are campers, and its a pain when we go to book and the fort is filled; and more disheartening when we finally snag a space, get there and realize there are empty spots all over.

But IMHO if you pay for a site, its yours, whether you sleep there or not. Disney certainly isn't losing money, you paid for the site, and now you aren't even using their water and electric. Sites are hot commodities, it just means we have to make our reservations as soon as we think we're heading south.

I do know someone who works for Disney said there are lots of other reasons for sites being empty besides booking and not using. I don't think every family vacations Saturday-Saturday and that is probably the biggest reason they sit empty. I can see where it is frustrating to have problems getting a reservation, but your awareness of how popular they are is a big help to snagging one.