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

[OtherScott]

That's good news (well, not for everyone, I suppose).

Even if the MB is not deactivated, the FP entitlements are based on your ticket. So, it seems like the MB scanner should be able to tell if that MB is linked to the ticket you used to enter the park. Only one band should be. That would eliminate the use of additional MBs to get more FPs.

Use your first three and THEN get more as stated in the terms & conditions.

For the record, I'm not happy about those terms & conditions, but I'm not going to use invalid ticket media to get more just because someone discovered that it works. Booking a throw-away room that you pay for entitles you to certain things and I have no issue with people doing that. But, regardless of your lodging arrangements, you are only entitled to FPs using the ticket/MB you used to enter the park (or supposed to be anyway).

Exactly. If the MB wasn't scanned at gate, or manually entered by CS, decline it at FP kiosk. If it's linked to a valid ticket but hasn't been scanned at gate or entered manually by CS, and someone uses it at FP kiosk, assume someone got past without scanning ticket and dock the ticket for that day.

eezy peezy

 

[asmit4]

Exactly. If the MB wasn't scanned at gate, or manually entered by CS, decline it at FP kiosk. If it's linked to a valid ticket but hasn't been scanned at gate or entered manually by CS, and someone uses it at FP kiosk, assume someone got past without scanning ticket and dock the ticket for that day.

eezy peezy

 

[Cartwright]

That's good news (well, not for everyone, I suppose).

Even if the MB is not deactivated, the FP entitlements are based on your ticket. So, it seems like the MB scanner should be able to tell if that MB is linked to the ticket you used to enter the park. Only one band should be. That would eliminate the use of additional MBs to get more FPs.

Use your first three and THEN get more as stated in the terms & conditions.

For the record, I'm not happy about those terms & conditions, but I'm not going to use invalid ticket media to get more just because someone discovered that it works. Booking a throw-away room that you pay for entitles you to certain things and I have no issue with people doing that. But, regardless of your lodging arrangements, you are only entitled to FPs using the ticket/MB you used to enter the park (or supposed to be anyway).

I want to make sure not to violate any Disney policies with the throwaway room, could you please share the link to the terms and conditions? I want to make sure that I am getting the same benefits that others are getting but I will not break any rules to do so.

I'm not looking for a debate on the ethics of the following since it's clear that people have vastly different opinions. I'm just trying to find the Disney policy on these specific questions:

- Do the Disney terms and conditions require an active ticket for SDFP on EACH MB? Obviously, each person needs an active ticket to gain entry to the park but do they say that a person can't have 10 MBs for 10 same day FPs at one time? It's clear that the kiosks are allowing it for MBs without an active ticket but I want to make sure that it is not a glitch. If I'm paying $49 for the throwaway camp site (but would gladly pay more if that's what Disney was asking for these privileges), I want to make sure that I am not breaking any rules.

- Do the terms and conditions specify that a person is limited to just one MB? Besides funny looks, will there be any issues with strolling up to a kiosk with an armful of MBs (whether obtained from a throwaway room or purchased individually in a gift shop)?

 

[Luckybee]

I want to make sure not to violate any Disney policies with the throwaway room, could you please share the link to the terms and conditions? I want to make sure that I am getting the same benefits that others are getting but I will not break any rules to do so.

I'm not looking for a debate on the ethics of the following since it's clear that people have vastly different opinions. I'm just trying to find the Disney policy on these specific questions:

- Do the Disney terms and conditions require an active ticket for SDFP on EACH MB? Obviously, each person needs an active ticket to gain entry to the park but do they say that a person can't have 10 MBs for 10 same day FPs at one time? It's clear that the kiosks are allowing it for MBs without an active ticket but I want to make sure that it is not a glitch. If I'm paying $49 for the throwaway camp site (but would gladly pay more if that's what Disney was asking for these privileges), I want to make sure that I am not breaking any rules.

- Do the terms and conditions specify that a person is limited to just one MB? Besides funny looks, will there be any issues with strolling up to a kiosk with an armful of MBs (whether obtained from a throwaway room or purchased individually in a gift shop)?

First of all understand that you are talking about 2 different things. One is the throwaway room, which in essence is an offsite guest books a room/ campsite a night which gives them the opportunity to get certain benefits. The concept as originally discussed on this thread was for the guest to be able to book FP's at the 60 day mark instead of 30, mb's for the family, parking for the days on property(arrival and departure day if you book one night), adr's slightly earlier(prb only relevant if you want bog). The original concept involved the guest paying for the room but not sleeping in it, hence the name throwaway.
Other strategies have since come into play but not necessarily tied to the throwaway ie...cancellations after booking, but what you are talking about along with others on the thread relating to the extra fp's / magic bands really is not specific to the throwaway and there are other threads that deal with that which might be the better place to ask about that. Im sure though someone here might also give you advice, but I mention this because I've noticed various comments which seem to be confusing the throwaway with the MB strategies.
Im not going to offer you any advice on the MB strategies since I only know what I've read on the other threads and havent personally had any experience with it.

 

[magicbob]

First of all understand that you are talking about 2 different things. One is the throwaway room, which in essence is an offsite guest books a room/ campsite a night which gives them the opportunity to get certain benefits. The concept as originally discussed on this thread was for the guest to be able to book FP's at the 60 day mark instead of 30, mb's for the family, parking for the days on property(arrival and departure day if you book one night), adr's slightly earlier(prb only relevant if you want bog). The original concept involved the guest paying for the room but not sleeping in it, hence the name throwaway.
Other strategies have since come into play but not necessarily tied to the throwaway ie...cancellations after booking, but what you are talking about along with others on the thread relating to the extra fp's / magic bands really is not specific to the throwaway and there are other threads that deal with that which might be the better place to ask about that. Im sure though someone here might also give you advice, but I mention this because I've noticed various comments which seem to be confusing the throwaway with the MB strategies.
Im not going to offer you any advice on the MB strategies since I only know what I've read on the other threads and havent personally had any experience with it.

Sorry if I confused the issue by referencing "MB hoarders." That is a different issue from booking a throw-away room, although there is some crossover into this territory because one of the ways to GET those extra MBs is to book a room and then cancel.

As far as ethics/rules are concerned, my advice is "let your conscience be your guide." It's not unanimous, but the general consensus is that booking and paying for one night onsite (whether or not you actually sleep in the room) is not unethical since you are paying for the room just like anyone else.

Even if it were not ethical, doing so is not against the "rules" (in fact, conventional wisdom is that Disney probably welcomes people spending extra on a room - even a "throwaway" room - in order to get those perks).

Booking a room to get the perks, and then cancelling the reservation is treading into different territory IMO. And then there's the extreme end of the spectrum, which is obtaining multiple sets of MBs (by booking and cancelling reservations or by any other means) and getting essentially unlimited (subject to same day availability) FPs by using bands that are not associated with that day's admission. But that can be accomplished without booking a throwaway room and, conversely, booking a throwaway room does not equate to doing that.

Again, just my opinion, but I think you are not breaking any rules by booking a room to get the MBs, 60-day booking window, parking, EMH, use of the pool, etc. When you book the onsite room, you are paying for those associated perks. You are also paying for the right to sleep in the room that night, but whether you do or not is irrelevant.

These days, I usually stay onsite anyway, so maybe I don't have "a dog in this hunt" but I could see another benefit to a throwaway room (that I alluded to above)...

You can take a midday break (nap in the room or use it to change and go swimming in the resort pool) without having to travel offsite. This would save time and be an enjoyable "onsite" midday break. And it also absolves you of the sin of "not using" the room.

I'm sure someone will come along and tell me this idea is inconsiderate because taking a nap in the room means that mousekeeping now has to change the sheets even though you didn't spend the night in that room.

 

[cakebaker]

I want to make sure not to violate any Disney policies with the throwaway room, could you please share the link to the terms and conditions? I want to make sure that I am getting the same benefits that others are getting but I will not break any rules to do so.

I'm not looking for a debate on the ethics of the following since it's clear that people have vastly different opinions. I'm just trying to find the Disney policy on these specific questions:

- Do the Disney terms and conditions require an active ticket for SDFP on EACH MB? Obviously, each person needs an active ticket to gain entry to the park but do they say that a person can't have 10 MBs for 10 same day FPs at one time? It's clear that the kiosks are allowing it for MBs without an active ticket but I want to make sure that it is not a glitch. If I'm paying $49 for the throwaway camp site (but would gladly pay more if that's what Disney was asking for these privileges), I want to make sure that I am not breaking any rules.

- Do the terms and conditions specify that a person is limited to just one MB? Besides funny looks, will there be any issues with strolling up to a kiosk with an armful of MBs (whether obtained from a throwaway room or purchased individually in a gift shop)?

Do the terms and conditions specify that a person is limited to just one MB? Besides funny looks, will there be any issues with strolling up to a kiosk with an armful of MBs (whether obtained from a throwaway room or purchased individually in a gift shop)?

Disney says this on their faq's-

Your MagicBand or card is unique to you and only you are authorized to access the benefits associated with it

...However, getting multiple MagicBands or cards does not give you multiple entitlements, such as additional FastPass+ selections or park admission.

So it would seem that you can have as many as you want, you're not allowed additional benefits from having them.

That of course, does not mean that it's acceptable to Disney to create fictitious names and lie about who is actually on your reservation- for any reason, not just in order to get more bands. But since they prohibit you from using multiple bands to obtain more fp's- it doesn't matter.

 

[magicbob]

But since they prohibit you from using multiple bands to obtain more fp's- it doesn't matter.

Although it may be "prohibited" the kiosks apparently allow it to occur. Seems to me that was a pretty big oversight in writing the code. Time will tell whether they bother to fix this or not.

The fix is for them to simply have the scanner check to see if the band was used for entry into the park. Each guest would only have one band that this is true for.

Unless, as was actually discussed in the early days of FP+ testing, someone purchased and used an extra ticket just to get the additional passes. But that would require them to activate the second band at the turnstile and debit a day from their second ticket (not a cost effective option, but an option nevertheless). It still amazes me that people were (are?) willing to pay double the admission cost to get double the FPs. I think those discussions of purchasing an extra ticket died down right about the time it was discovered that you could use an extra MB without having to spend the money on the extra ticket.

Sorry for going off on this tangent, but these topics are all somewhat related.

So, concerning "throwaway" rooms... I mentioned in another thread that even someone staying onsite could book a second room (or campsite) as a "throwaway." Even though you'd already be eligible for some of the perks (60-day window, free parking, EMH), would the cost be worth it just for additional MBs? If you can get 10 extra and those can be used for essentially unlimited SDFP+, I think even some onsite guests would consider a "throwaway" campsite reservation. But I think onsite guests booking like that would go away if the loophole is closed, because they'd already be getting every other perk associated with the second reservation.

 

[cakebaker]

Although it may be "prohibited" the kiosks apparently allow it to occur. Seems to me that was a pretty big oversight in writing the code. Time will tell whether they bother to fix this or not.

Yes, but what I was responding to wasn't whether you could get away with doing it- you can. The question, at least as I understood it, was did Disney prohibit it- they do.

It does at least answer the question- is it "ok" to do it and it answers the one justification that is like nails across a chalkboard to me- It's "ok" to do it because I can do it. At least it's not "ok" with Disney.

Just as with almost every scam or game on the system ever thought of by people, Disney will fix it when it gets to be a big enough strain on the system.

So, concerning "throwaway" rooms... I mentioned in another thread that even someone staying onsite could book a second room (or campsite) as a "throwaway." Even though you'd already be eligible for some of the perks (60-day window, free parking, EMH), would the cost be worth it just for additional MBs? If you can get 10 extra and those can be used for essentially unlimited SDFP+, I think even some onsite guests would consider a "throwaway" campsite reservation. But I think onsite guests booking like that would go away if the loophole is closed, because they'd already be getting every other perk associated with the second reservation.

I'm not sure of the need for anyone to have dozens of bands for sdfp. In the peak season, kiosk lines are long and cumbersome. In the off season, it's hardly worth spending time at the kiosks getting passes all the time. But sure, it works for on site as well as off, but as you say, the only added perk is sdfp as we're getting all the other perks anyway. We're also getting the real 60 day window, so much easier to obtain the hard to get fp's than a 1 day fake reservation.

Right now, we have at least 6 bands, gotten legitimately, that will not be used on our upcoming vacation. We could bring them and get more sdfp, but why? Lines aren't long right now, the hot fp's aren't going to be available same day, and if it's not a hot ride, the lines aren't long. Seems silly to stand at a kiosk and get a fp to skip a line that doesn't exist. Even if you just totally ignore that you're violating Disney policy, it still doesn't make any sense.

 

[doconeill]

This fix shouldn't be to see if the band was used to enter the park, it will be to see if the TICKET the band is associated with was used to enter the park. FP+ is supposed to tie back to the ticket. You can have multiple bands that you can use interchangeably, but only one active ticket. But there's a catch it seems...

If I'm understanding the various reports, it seems to me that they took yet another shortcut in the programming of SDFP+ to just accept any band associated with a unique MDX account, and allow SDFP+ without checking the ticket credentials and tying all the way back. Basically a form of what I called very early on "anonymous" FP+, for day guests who don't have an MDX account. The park's own FP+ computers first check to see if there are any "main" FP+ in the central computers, and if not, keep it local. That's why you have to switch parks to get a FP+ in another park, and can't use the app to get the additional ones.

That could be harder to fix than I thought, although a workaround might be to just flag the band as the one used to enter the park as described...and thus losing the "interchangeability". Probably not a big deal as there probably aren't too many that bring more than one band/card to the parks and use both - unless they are trying to exploit the loophole.

 

[OtherScott]

Although it may be "prohibited" the kiosks apparently allow it to occur. Seems to me that was a pretty big oversight in writing the code. Time will tell whether they bother to fix this or not.

The fix is for them to simply have the scanner check to see if the band was used for entry into the park. Each guest would only have one band that this is true for.

Unless, as was actually discussed in the early days of FP+ testing, someone purchased and used an extra ticket just to get the additional passes. But that would require them to activate the second band at the turnstile and debit a day from their second ticket (not a cost effective option, but an option nevertheless). It still amazes me that people were (are?) willing to pay double the admission cost to get double the FPs. I think those discussions of purchasing an extra ticket died down right about the time it was discovered that you could use an extra MB without having to spend the money on the extra ticket.

Sorry for going off on this tangent, but these topics are all somewhat related.

So, concerning "throwaway" rooms... I mentioned in another thread that even someone staying onsite could book a second room (or campsite) as a "throwaway." Even though you'd already be eligible for some of the perks (60-day window, free parking, EMH), would the cost be worth it just for additional MBs? If you can get 10 extra and those can be used for essentially unlimited SDFP+, I think even some onsite guests would consider a "throwaway" campsite reservation. But I think onsite guests booking like that would go away if the loophole is closed, because they'd already be getting every other perk associated with the second reservation.

Thread would 3 pages if OP had used "extremely short split stay - physical presence not required" instead of "throwaway room."

 

[CaliTex]

I wonder how long it will be before campsites are exempt from the FP+ system, OR all guests are asked to spend another 200-300 dollars for the "privilege" of fast pass? Or the "privilege" is only for those staying Moderate or Deluxe?

Good Lord, people. You think up stuff that never even occurs to me. Congratulations. Keep it up...squeeze every everything out of everything... after all, you deserve it.

I think I will write a parody song, to the tune of the Sound of Music's "Climb Every Mountain" called "Exploit Every Loophole"

 

[cakebaker]

I wonder how long it will be before campsites are exempt from the FP+ system, OR all guests are asked to spend another 200-300 dollars for the "privilege" of fast pass? Or the "privilege" is only for those staying Moderate or Deluxe?

Good Lord, people. You think up stuff that never even occurs to me. Congratulations. Keep it up...squeeze every everything out of everything... after all, you deserve it.

I think I will write a parody song, to the tune of the Sound of Music's "Climb Every Mountain" called "Exploit Every Loophole"

You're preaching to the choir with me. Thing is, for most that do this, they don't care. They don't stay on site and so if on site guests lose out- so what. I suspect there's a good number of them that sit back and smile in satisfaction when on site guests get to pay the price for this kind of stuff. There's more than a few that resent on site guests getting perks at all.

And before I get lambasted for painting with a broad brush- in case it wasn't noticed, I said MOST, A GOOD NUMBER- not all or everyone.

Please do write that song- I'd love to see it- at least give us something to laugh about while ready this stuff.

 

[Roxy13]

The longer this goes on, the more unfair it is to onsite guests. I have no problem with throwaway room and getting onsite perks for check in and check out days. Being able to book all FP+ while staying offsite crosses the line even though Disney's system allows it. No wonder onsite people are having difficulty getting FP+ at 60 days ahead. How is this fair when Disney gives onsite the ability of 60 days and offsite 30 days. Disney considers FP+ being an onsite guest perk at 60 days, now anybody regardless are booking at 60 days. It may be a loophole but would you admit to Disney what you are doing, I think not. This all about me and my family attitude is hurting everyone.

 

[nugov2]

You're preaching to the choir with me. Thing is, for most that do this, they don't care. They don't stay on site and so if on site guests lose out- so what. I suspect there's a good number of them that sit back and smile in satisfaction when on site guests get to pay the price for this kind of stuff. There's more than a few that resent on site guests getting perks at all.

And before I get lambasted for painting with a broad brush- in case it wasn't noticed, I said MOST, A GOOD NUMBER- not all or everyone.

Please do write that song- I'd love to see it- at least give us something to laugh about while ready this stuff.

Why would anyone want onsite to lose their perks...especially the group booking/paying for rooms to get the perks? Obviously some off site guests want the perks for onsite and will pay for a hotel room to get them, but just don't want to forced to sleep there.

The bottom line is there are lots of people who exploit loopholes in different scenarios in life to make the best of their spending or vacation. Each individual has to decide what is right for them. You have exploited one in your previous trips(but hey I know you say it isn't a loophole so it must be true), but now choose to lambast others on this one. It is silly. Some will use a kohls 30% off code when it wasn't emailed or mailed to them just because the code is available online. That is exploiting a loophole, I'm pretty sure kohls didn't intend for every person who can do a google search to get a 30% off and know there is a large number of people who exploit this, but they don't change it b/c they know at the end of the day they are getting money from a customer they wouldn't have without the code. There are tons of other examples of minor exploitations that are done by people everyday.

We get it there are some offended by it as has been stated over and over on this thread. Why not just move on already and let those who are looking for information on this particular strategy find the info they need. If WDW has a problem with it, they can easily change the system without impacting their "true" onsite guest by ending the FP perks the same way they do EMH and parking. I doubt people doing this is going to cause WDW to strip all perks from on site guests. That seems very dramatic.

 

[cakebaker]

We get it there are some offended by it as has been stated over and over on this thread. Why not just move on already and let those who are looking for information on this particular strategy find the info they need. If WDW has a problem with it, they can easily change the system without impacting their "true" onsite guest by ending the FP perks the same way they do EMH and parking. I doubt people doing this is going to cause WDW to strip all perks from on site guests. That seems very dramatic.

People are free to continue to comment on these practices all they want. I'm sorry if it slows down the free flow of information on how to abuse the system.

 

[cousineddie]

I wonder how long it will be before campsites are exempt from the FP+ system, OR all guests are asked to spend another 200-300 dollars for the "privilege" of fast pass? Or the "privilege" is only for those staying Moderate or Deluxe? Good Lord, people. You think up stuff that never even occurs to me. Congratulations. Keep it up...squeeze every everything out of everything... after all, you deserve it. I think I will write a parody song, to the tune of the Sound of Music's "Climb Every Mountain" called "Exploit Every Loophole"

That would be very unfortunate.

The campgrounds are full of people and families from all walks of life. Yes, there are the families that save their pennies and can only stay onsite at the campgrounds in a tent and then there are the guys rolling in with their $1,000,000+ custom coaches and a disney trip is just another stop on their full-time traveling lifestyle.

We, however, are in the middle with a vintage camper and a used truck. We've been twice and stayed in the campgrounds because that's where we prefer to be. We use our own beds, have our own space, and enjoy camping a lot more than hotels, condos and even specially themed rooms. Why pay more for what you can bring with you?

What we do like is the fact that we're a short boat ride away from MK, have the dining plan (although we don't qualify for the free one anymore - don't know if it was from abuse or lack of interest. Many campers eat at their sites), and the atmosphere of the Fort and the friendliness of the people you meet there.

I would like to think that Disney would think long and hard before cutting onsite perks from the campgrounds.

 

[nugov2]

Folks please keep to the topic of the thread.
Whether this is appropriate or not it is the responsibility of Disney.
I remind you all that 1 to 1 debates or attacks will not be tolerated.

People are free to continue to comment on these practices all they want. I'm sorry if it slows down the free flow of information on how to abuse the system.

Actually the moderator has already asked to keep to the topic of the thread. The topic of this thread isn't are people who using throwaway rooms morally bankrupt or will it cause on site to lose their perks so start a new thread to discuss those topics specifically if you want.

 

[Luvchefmic]

Don't worry cousineddie I feel very comfortable saying that will NEVER happen, there would be an uproar at the Fort and rightly so. I have always loved it there and it was the first on-site we ever stayed in almost 35 yrs ago. I think this is why this bothers me the most.

Meanwhile the Disney Co will figure it out, and end it when they want to/if they want to.

To me it would be such an easy fix and I have said it repeatedly. Scenario: Family comes in on DME, has reservation to camp on a tent site. Where is your tent ? Must go to Ft Wilderness to physically check-in, CM goes out and makes sure you have a tent since you are renting a tent site. No tent, not staying here.

 

[Canuckbiggs]

Don't worry cousineddie I feel very comfortable saying that will NEVER happen, there would be an uproar at the Fort and rightly so. I have always loved it there and it was the first on-site we ever stayed in almost 35 yrs ago. I think this is why this bothers me the most.

Meanwhile the Disney Co will figure it out, and end it when they want to/if they want to.

To me it would be such an easy fix and I have said it repeatedly. Scenario: Family comes in on DME, has reservation to camp on a tent site. Where is your tent ? Must go to Ft Wilderness to physically check-in, CM goes out and makes sure you have a tent since you are renting a tent site. No tent, not staying here.

What's next. Check bags for underwear and toothbrushes at value resorts too?

Maybe every Disney reservation should include a search warrant.

 

[cakebaker]

Actually the moderator has already asked to keep to the topic of the thread. The topic of this thread isn't are people who using throwaway rooms morally bankrupt or will it cause on site to lose their perks so start a new thread to discuss those topics specifically if you want.

The topic is throwaway rooms- not a primer on throwaway rooms. So if someone wants to discuss the possible results of doing that...well, I'm not the moderator. I'll let them decide if that's within guidelines.

You should probably let the moderators do their job instead of trying to do it for them. Pretty sure we can all paste and copy some comments on this thread that violate what that moderator posted.

I can't speak to anyone else, but for quite some time on this thread, I've tried not not discuss the ethics of this but to discuss what the possible repercussions are. For the most part, I've tried to not say whether Disney thinks this is "wrong" , but what will happen should they decide it is.

I'm not always successful, as is no one. But anytime a moderator feels I'm over the line, they are free to let me know.

For now, I think we're within the guidelines to discuss the general subject of throwaways- not just a thread on "how to".