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

[nluvwithdisney]

I agree. It's a loophole. I think eventually it will be fixed in the least way to bring as little attention as possible.

In project management, there is risk analysis, perhaps with all the resources dumped into this, the "throwaway room" was an acceptable risk without jeopardizing the "go live" date.

I personally feel FP+ should be for onsite guests and tied to the length of stay of the room reservation or if you have an AP.

Off site guests would need to pay a "premium" for fast pass. The cost should be high enough to maybe "discourage" from wanting to pay it but at the same time making it "reachable" enough to make it seem like a good deal.

ADR's don't concern me as much but there is a way to control that as well. For walk ups onsite guests should get priority over offsite guests sort of like Landrys does for those who have their membership card or allow ADR's for onsite guests only.

Just my opinion....

 

[ACJT]

Doesn't the number of days you can book FP+ for a one night stay depend on the type (number of days) of park tickets you buy with that room?

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

 

[jimandami]

Doesn't the number of days you can book FP+ for a one night stay depend on the type (number of days) of park tickets you buy with that room?

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

Kind of. If you have a one night stay, you can book for the check-in and check-out day at day 60. You cannot continue to book for the next 6, 7, or 8 days on day 60 no matter how many days worth of tickets you have linked. However, you can continue to book for as many days as you have tickets in a rolling fashion, booking one day at a time....the way off site guests have to book ADRs at the 180 day mark. It is actually a HUGE difference because right now, the only way to get A&E and maybe SDMT at the 60 day mark (without having to scour and search and copy, etc...) is to have that on-site advantage where you can book for days 6-10 of your trip all on the same day. For example, we are going Oct 25-Nov 4 (on-site) and when logged on at midnight on my 60th day, the first day that had A&E was Oct 31, which is day 7 for us. So, even a throwaway room really won't help you get that coveted A&E FP+.

 

[asmit4]

Disney needs to make it so your 60 day FP status is tied to your onsite ressie. Stay for one night- you get 2 days FP at 60 day status and that is it. Same with ADRs. Once they do this- the 'problem' is solved. In addition, if you cancel your onsite ressie- ALL FPs made btwn 60 and 30 days should be CANCELLED. PAY up or forfeit your FP benefit.

I booked a throwaway room- not for the MBs. We already have MBs- but for the FPs and EMHs. (we were well inside the 180 days when we booked). I have no problem with this being tied to my reservation. In fact, I'd push for it. I did not use my throwaway to gain access to any more than 2 days FP as we are staying onsite during part of our trip anyway so I didn't need the extra FP. I also would never dream of cancelling my ressie inside the 30 days just to keep FP. THAT is 100% stealing IMO.

I am paying the disney rate for the disney inclusions- nothing more. My choice is to not sleep in the bed. Just as someone else chose to use the gym only. I have a feeling that disney is cranking the #s and will be 'fixing' this loop soon. You get what you pay for- simple as that- nothing more. I'd also guess that they will make a 2 night minimum at some point in the near future- at least during high season. Time will tell!

 

[Luvchefmic]

Disney needs to make it so your 60 day FP status is tied to your onsite ressie. Stay for one night- you get 2 days FP at 60 day status and that is it. Same with ADRs. Once they do this- the 'problem' is solved. In addition, if you cancel your onsite ressie- ALL FPs made btwn 60 and 30 days should be CANCELLED. PAY up or forfeit your FP benefit.

I booked a throwaway room- not for the MBs. We already have MBs- but for the FPs and EMHs. (we were well inside the 180 days when we booked). I have no problem with this being tied to my reservation. In fact, I'd push for it. I did not use my throwaway to gain access to any more than 2 days FP as we are staying onsite during part of our trip anyway so I didn't need the extra FP. I also would never dream of cancelling my ressie inside the 30 days just to keep FP. THAT is 100% stealing IMO.

I am paying the disney rate for the disney inclusions- nothing more. My choice is to not sleep in the bed. Just as someone else chose to use the gym only. I have a feeling that disney is cranking the #s and will be 'fixing' this loop soon. You get what you pay for- simple as that- nothing more. I'd also guess that they will make a 2 night minimum at some point in the near future- at least during high season. Time will tell!

I will agree with the majority of what you said EXCEPT for 2 things. The way it works with an ADR is fine. The smartest thing they ever did was the CC hold, to me it has stopped the hoarding to a certain degree. The cancellation policy is fair. Yes I know someone could get sick and not be able to go, I have found the dining line extremely helpful in the situation of a truck driving husband who couldn't get home when we thought he could.

Going to a 2 night stay minimum though would be totally unfair to someone like me and my husband ( and there are plenty of us in this situation ) locals that go to WDW for a hard ticket event, or over to a restaurant to celebrate an anniversary, a birthday, etc. and might want to stay the night instead of driving home.

 

[cakebaker]

Going to a 2 night stay minimum though would be totally unfair to someone like me and my husband

Yes, it would and that's why I complain about the throwaway rooms. I honestly believe that at some point Disney is going to sit up and take notice. When they do, they'll "fix" it and I see no other option that is as quick and easy ( on their part) than requiring a minimum night stay.

That won't stop it, some people will be willing to book throwaway for 2 nights. But it will slow it down tremendously.


To hell with ethics- what's ethical to you may not be to me and only affects what one person thinks of another. It's what Disney will do to "fix" if they deem this an issue. Historically, Disney has had no qualms in penalizing AP holders, locals or on site guests when they "fix" things.


All I'm saying is maybe people should give some thought to the long term repercussions of their actions instead of going with "get what you can while you can".

 

[cakebaker]

I also would never dream of cancelling my ressie inside the 30 days just to keep FP. THAT is 100% stealing IMO.

Here's the thing I don't understand.

I've read over and over again on this thread that a throwaway that's paid for is OK with Disney, and in fact they intended it to happen. The claim is, Disney isn't stupid. They could've fixed it where that doesn't happen and because they didn't, it means they intended for this to happen.

So...why pay for the room? You aren't breaking any Disney rules. Disney allows it to happen so it must be fine with them. They must actually want it to happen.

People really should just admit it's an obvious loophole they're taking advantage of while they can...at least for those who subscribe to the notion that because they are allowed to do it, it's ok to do it.

 

[nugov2]

I agree. It's a loophole. I think eventually it will be fixed in the least way to bring as little attention as possible.

In project management, there is risk analysis, perhaps with all the resources dumped into this, the "throwaway room" was an acceptable risk without jeopardizing the "go live" date.

I personally feel FP+ should be for onsite guests and tied to the length of stay of the room reservation or if you have an AP.

Off site guests would need to pay a "premium" for fast pass. The cost should be high enough to maybe "discourage" from wanting to pay it but at the same time making it "reachable" enough to make it seem like a good deal.

ADR's don't concern me as much but there is a way to control that as well. For walk ups onsite guests should get priority over offsite guests sort of like Landrys does for those who have their membership card or allow ADR's for onsite guests only.

Just my opinion....

Disney would hemorrhage money if they did that. Off site makes up such a huge portion of WDW guests that they would never change their policy to that. It would be the worst business decision they could make. I for one would love for WDW to go to the Universal method of FP, but to do that they would have to exclude value and mod and only offer it to deluxe guests and that too would be an awful business decision. It would be great though and I certainly would pay to stay deluxe like we are at Uni...but I still wouldn't sleep there.

Disney needs to make it so your 60 day FP status is tied to your onsite ressie. Stay for one night- you get 2 days FP at 60 day status and that is it. Same with ADRs. Once they do this- the 'problem' is solved. In addition, if you cancel your onsite ressie- ALL FPs made btwn 60 and 30 days should be CANCELLED. PAY up or forfeit your FP benefit.

I booked a throwaway room- not for the MBs. We already have MBs- but for the FPs and EMHs. (we were well inside the 180 days when we booked). I have no problem with this being tied to my reservation. In fact, I'd push for it. I did not use my throwaway to gain access to any more than 2 days FP as we are staying onsite during part of our trip anyway so I didn't need the extra FP. I also would never dream of cancelling my ressie inside the 30 days just to keep FP. THAT is 100% stealing IMO.

I am paying the disney rate for the disney inclusions- nothing more. My choice is to not sleep in the bed. Just as someone else chose to use the gym only. I have a feeling that disney is cranking the #s and will be 'fixing' this loop soon. You get what you pay for- simple as that- nothing more. I'd also guess that they will make a 2 night minimum at some point in the near future- at least during high season. Time will tell!

I'd have zero problem if WDW required you to a length of stay for the prebooking perk. I just don't think they will b/c the amount of guests they would lose who use this strategy would drop significantly and they no longer would be able to get the extra revenue they are possibly getting. Only time will tell if they find offering this perk of being able to prebook your FP for the entire trip with a one night stay profitable or not.

 

[nugov2]

Here's the thing I don't understand.

I've read over and over again on this thread that a throwaway that's paid for is OK with Disney, and in fact they intended it to happen. The claim is, Disney isn't stupid. They could've fixed it where that doesn't happen and because they didn't, it means they intended for this to happen.

So...why pay for the room? You aren't breaking any Disney rules. Disney allows it to happen so it must be fine with them. They must actually want it to happen.

People really should just admit it's an obvious loophole they're taking advantage of while they can...at least for those who subscribe to the notion that because they are allowed to do it, it's ok to do it.

Actually there have been reports of people losing their fp once they cancel the room. Some do and some don't...that is proof THAT is a glitch/loophole. With a one night stay guests are able to book their FP in advance as described(check in/check out at 60 days and then each day of the ticket when that window opens) EVERY SINGLE TIME...that is proof it is NOT a glitch/loophole. Anyone who has any knowledge of how these systems work know it is a very easy fix for WDW to turn that feature off. People should really admit it is obvious this is what Disney intended to maximize profits from a certain demographic of offsite guests

 

[Mambo Junkie]

Disney needs to make it so your 60 day FP status is tied to your onsite ressie. Stay for one night- you get 2 days FP at 60 day status and that is it. Same with ADRs. Once they do this- the 'problem' is solved. In addition, if you cancel your onsite ressie- ALL FPs made btwn 60 and 30 days should be CANCELLED. PAY up or forfeit your FP benefit.

I booked a throwaway room- not for the MBs. We already have MBs- but for the FPs and EMHs. (we were well inside the 180 days when we booked). I have no problem with this being tied to my reservation. In fact, I'd push for it. I did not use my throwaway to gain access to any more than 2 days FP as we are staying onsite during part of our trip anyway so I didn't need the extra FP. I also would never dream of cancelling my ressie inside the 30 days just to keep FP. THAT is 100% stealing IMO.

I am paying the disney rate for the disney inclusions- nothing more. My choice is to not sleep in the bed. Just as someone else chose to use the gym only. I have a feeling that disney is cranking the #s and will be 'fixing' this loop soon. You get what you pay for- simple as that- nothing more. I'd also guess that they will make a 2 night minimum at some point in the near future- at least during high season. Time will tell!

Very well said!

 

[nluvwithdisney]

Disney would hemorrhage money if they did that. Off site makes up such a huge portion of WDW guests that they would never change their policy to that. It would be the worst business decision they could make. I for one would love for WDW to go to the Universal method of FP, but to do that they would have to exclude value and mod and only offer it to deluxe guests and that too would be an awful business decision. It would be great though and I certainly would pay to stay deluxe like we are at Uni...but I still wouldn't sleep there. I'd have zero problem if WDW required you to a length of stay for the prebooking perk. I just don't think they will b/c the amount of guests they would lose who use this strategy would drop significantly and they no longer would be able to get the extra revenue they are possibly getting. Only time will tell if they find offering this perk of being able to prebook your FP for the entire trip with a one night stay profitable or not.

Onsite guests deserve onsite perks. No question about that. Offsite guests found a loophole and have now abused it by the throwaway room. Don't call it a perk. It's a loophole.

Yes, Disney has no problem with taking your money for a room you will not use but I think now that the abusing of FP+ is a different issue.

 

[DVCMomBLT]

Personally, I don't think it is - but whatever, if you think it's cool then good for you.

Is it OK they get $50 worth of magic bands because its cheaper to book a throwaway room than buy them separately at $13/each?



How is that not a weeks worth of benefits (minus parking, which they would pay anyway)? In the FP+ thread people will sacrifice their own parents for an A&E FP+. The ability to book ADRs & FP+ is a huge benefit.

They are getting 2 days worth of parking, and a magic band for each member of their party - any more than 3 people and you come out ahead, and the FP+ and ADR perks. And the benefit of staying off-site (whether you want to view that as a cost saving, or more amenities for the price, either way).

So if you take 3 parties, with the exact same details (size, dates, touring plans, desired ADRs, etc) but one stays on site, one does throwaway room, and one stays completely off-property, who comes out ahead?

I don't think it is OK either. But you'll notice in my example, there was NO throwaway room. So I repeat, your issue isn't with throwaway rooms, your issue is with Disney not limiting all onsite benefits to the number of days you are onsite. It is the exact same issue if you stay at VGF for 1 night and then offsite for the next 6.

 

[Luvchefmic]

I agree. It's a loophole. I think eventually it will be fixed in the least way to bring as little attention as possible.

In project management, there is risk analysis, perhaps with all the resources dumped into this, the "throwaway room" was an acceptable risk without jeopardizing the "go live" date.

I personally feel FP+ should be for onsite guests and tied to the length of stay of the room reservation or if you have an AP.

Off site guests would need to pay a "premium" for fast pass. The cost should be high enough to maybe "discourage" from wanting to pay it but at the same time making it "reachable" enough to make it seem like a good deal.

ADR's don't concern me as much but there is a way to control that as well. For walk ups onsite guests should get priority over offsite guests sort of like Landrys does for those who have their membership card or allow ADR's for onsite guests only.

Just my opinion....

ADRs for onsite guests only ? FP+s for onsite guests & or AP holders only ?
Pay for FP if offsite ? Onsite guests had a perk for a very long time EMHs and that should have been good enough.

<----Just my opinion and so glad you are not in charge, it's a mess as it is already

 

[nluvwithdisney]

ADRs for onsite guests only ? FP+s for onsite guests & or AP holders only ? Pay for FP if offsite ? Onsite guests had a perk for a very long time EMHs and that should have been good enough. <----Just my opinion and so glad you are not in charge, it's a mess as it is already

Glad to add some humor!

You speak as the person who thinks Disney resorts are not good enough or too expensive so offsite is good for you but still wants the onsite perks!

Please correct me if I am wrong.

I didn't create the mess but those who want to exploit a loophole are partially responsible.

I remember the days where we all used to just wait in line! Lol

 

[nugov2]

Onsite guests deserve onsite perks. No question about that. Offsite guests found a loophole and have now abused it by the throwaway room. Don't call it a perk. It's a loophole.

Yes, Disney has no problem with taking your money for a room you will not use but I think now that the abusing of FP+ is a different issue.

They do get perks. EMH, DME, ADR and FP advanced booking.

You say it's a loophole I say it is a perk that WDW intends to have the system work that way to entice even a one night stay. The bottom line is that neither of us knows for sure until WDW officially releases a statement or just never changes it. When I booked my one night stay I specifically asked if that is how it worked because otherwise I would have booked more nights and the CM said it is. I am going by what they have specifically told me. It is like the people who say you cannot valet park at a resort unless you have an ADR or hotel resie when the valet stand employees state you specifically can park there as long as you pay. It isn't up to us to decide, it is up to the company and actions speak louder than words. You can say it is wrong and I can say it is right until we are both blue in the face. I'm not losing sleep over it and neither are you. You can chastise and tell people who do it they are unscrupulous people, but it does not make it true. I am sure you do lots of things I do not agree with and think is wrong. Different strokes for different folks

 

[Luvchefmic]

Glad to add some humor!

You speak as the person who thinks Disney resorts are not good enough or too expensive so offsite is good for you but still wants the onsite perks!
Please correct me if I am wrong.

I didn't create the mess but those who want to exploit a loophole are partially responsible.

I remember the days where we all used to just wait in line! Lol

What onsite perks do I want as a person who stays offsite ? I stay onsite a few times a year now that I am a local.

For the record: I have lived here since 2008. Prior to that I lived in NY and had a govt job where we could work O/T and save the time. I came down here every summer and stayed a month or more, usually on-site. EMH was the onsite perk and should still be the only one. Yes I would stay on property for a month.

ADRs and FP+ should be open to all, onsite or off and no advantage to either.
That was the beauty of FP legacy but that is a moot point. ADRs are important to more locals than I think you are aware of.

 

[alvernon90]

Onsite guests deserve onsite perks. No question about that. Offsite guests found a loophole and have now abused it by the throwaway room. Don't call it a perk. It's a loophole.

But if you have paid for an onsite room you ARE an onsite guest. It comes with a bundle of perks, one of which includes a bed to sleep in. Is it a "loophole" if I take advantage of the 60 day FP+ window but do not take advantage of EMH? If I book an onsite room but meet a beautiful woman while waiting in line for Splash Mountain and end up spending every night in her room, have I acted unethically? Why should sleeping in the bed be the one and only "perk" that makes someone a liar or thief if they don't use it?

I can see the argument that the advantages should not go longer than the length of the booked stay. And I certainly think Disney should cancel all associated FPs and ADRs when somebody cancels the throwaway room. But if you pay for a room, you are not stealing if you decline to sleep in that room.

 

[asmit4]

But if you have paid for an onsite room you ARE an onsite guest. It comes with a bundle of perks, one of which includes a bed to sleep in. Is it a "loophole" if I take advantage of the 60 day FP+ window but do not take advantage of EMH? If I book an onsite room but meet a beautiful woman while waiting in line for Splash Mountain and end up spending every night in her room, have I acted unethically? Why should sleeping in the bed be the one and only "perk" that makes someone a liar or thief if they don't use it?

I can see the argument that the advantages should not go longer than the length of the booked stay. And I certainly think Disney should cancel all associated FPs and ADRs when somebody cancels the throwaway room. But if you pay for a room, you are not stealing if you decline to sleep in that room.

^^^^^^^THIS!!!!

 

[cakebaker]

Actually there have been reports of people losing their fp once they cancel the room. Some do and some don't...that is proof THAT is a glitch/loophole.

No, really there haven't been many at all. But, even if there were, lots of folks have reported losing their fp's for no reason whatsover- booked on site, did everything right and one morning they woke up and the fp's were gone. Does that mean that being able to get fp's at all is a glitch? No.

So the fact that someone who cancelled their reservations lost their fp's does not mean there's a glitch. Until everyone who cancels loses theirs, it's no more a glitch than booking a throwaway that you pay for. I'd bet my last Disney dollar that there have been people who lost fp's that booked throwaways and paid for them. It had nothing to do with the fact that they aren't sleeping in the room. So it's a glitch too if that's the test.

With a one night stay guests are able to book their FP in advance as described(check in/check out at 60 days and then each day of the ticket when that window opens) EVERY SINGLE TIME...that is proof it is NOT a glitch/loophole.

That's exactly how it works for those who don't intend to pay. They don't book, cancel and then try and schedule them. Of course you couldn't do that. They book, schedule and patiently wait for the bands to get sent. Then they cancel. So, no difference there either.

Anyone who has any knowledge of how these systems work know it is a very easy fix for WDW to turn that feature off. People should really admit it is obvious this is what Disney intended to maximize profits from a certain demographic of offsite guests

It's equally, if not more so, easy to stop those who cancel.


So as I said before- it's no worse to book it and cancel than it is to book it and pay.

 

[DVCMomBLT]

So as I said before- it's no worse to book it and cancel than it is to book it and pay.

I assume you are kidding. Does this mean that no one should ever stay at the campgrounds?