What's behind the magic kingdom?

[grahamfam3]

I actually made this loop once, but from the other direction. I pulled out from SOG, and went left wondering what I could see of the Poly going that way. I ended up out by the Contempory after driving backstage and thinking "uh oh, am I supposed to be here", but I don't recall seeing any signs that warned me off driving from that direction (everyone else seems to be driving this loop going the other way, East To West) otherwise I would have turned around and gone back.

BTW, I agree about the road system and signage at WDW encouraging getting lost, but I would add that the maps you get don't really help a lot either.

 

[pilferk]

I can't tell you what the company's intentions are and neither can anyone else. All I can tell you is what the sign says.

True...but there are, reportedly, 2 conflicting signs depending on your direction of travel.

I could just as easily guess that they don't want people driving through the road from the Contemporary, but they also don't want lost guests wandering around on Reams Road wondering how to get back -- so they grant entry there as a convenience... but not exit because they don't want it to become a thoroughfare.

That's also logical. But it's also just a guess.

So your assumption is:

You can enter any time you'd like, but......you can...... NEVER LEAVE!!!



Sorry....couldn't resist. And yes...I know the lyric is really "check out any time you like".

See, my assumption is similar. They don't want TRUE thru traffic (the people travelling on Reams road using WDW roads to, say, get to the SuperWalmart quicker) coming through.

The sticking point is the phrase "Authorized" and what constitutes authorization and how it's granted.

My opinion is: If you are invited to use the road coming in, then you have to be allowed to leave by similar egress. That's Disney providing authorization. I think THAT "argument", if confronted with any accusation of rule breaking, is logical enough to stand the test of debate/litigation.

Yes, it's a guess. But it's a completely reasonable one given the signage at either end.

In any case, I don't believe the signs are simply left from some other period. Disney adds and removes signs all the time. They could easily take these out if they had wanted to.

I agree...I think they're there for a purpose.

 

[nytimez]

True...but there are, reportedly, 2 conflicting signs depending on your direction of travel.




So your assumption is:

You can enter any time you'd like, but......you can...... NEVER LEAVE!!!



Sorry....couldn't resist. And yes...I know the lyric is really "check out any time you like".

See, my assumption is similar. They don't want TRUE thru traffic (the people travelling on Reams road using WDW roads to, say, get to the SuperWalmart quicker) coming through.

The sticking point is the phrase "Authorized" and what constitutes authorization and how it's granted.

My opinion is: If you are invited to use the road coming in, then you have to be allowed to leave by similar egress. That's Disney providing authorization. I think THAT "argument", if confronted with any accusation of rule breaking, is logical enough to stand the test of debate/litigation.

Yes, it's a guess. But it's a completely reasonable one given the signage at either end.



I agree...I think they're there for a purpose.

I think perhaps the best way to put it, based on our guesses, is that it's quietly allowed... but not encouraged.

I think the problem with putting up guards and gates is the sheer traffic from all the CMs would cause backups onto either Reams Road or back into the Contemporary/MK bus area... it's also a two-lane road, so forcing a guest to turn around would be impractical.

So this, perhaps, is the best solution.

Again... just guessing.

 

[doconeill]

Wow...I thought this was put to bed already.

Yes, the signs conflict - sort of. Perhaps coming from Reams Rd. is OK, but coming from the Contemporary is not. It's a one-way thing.

Regardless, it is what it is.

I do have trouble with the assumption that guests qualify as "authorized vehicles" as guests would have no idea if they are authorized or not.

 

[nytimez]

Wow...I thought this was put to bed already.

Yes, the signs conflict - sort of. Perhaps coming from Reams Rd. is OK, but coming from the Contemporary is not. It's a one-way thing.

Regardless, it is what it is.

I do have trouble with the assumption that guests qualify as "authorized vehicles" as guests would have no idea if they are authorized or not.

Sorry, this one's my fault. I seemed to recall someone posted a fuzzy Google streetview pic of the sign that no one could read... so when I saw the sign, I actually thought of this thread and posted it. I even took a photo of it. How sad is that?

 

[carlton the bear]

How "Un-Disney" like for anyone trying to enter a non authorized area. I suggest the following:
1) Armed guards posted by the Contemporary with orders to shoot anyone trying to enter.
2)For those guests who think they can fool Disney by sneaking in on foot, WDW should build an electrified fence, preferably with a very deep moat stocked with man eating alligators.
Of course as there is a sign on the Reams Road side allowing basically anyone to enter, (or if they get prior permission from nytimez) guests are free to enter and roam around as they please.

 

[nytimez]

How "Un-Disney" like for anyone trying to enter a non authorized area. I suggest the following:
1) Armed guards posted by the Contemporary with orders to shoot anyone trying to enter.
2)For those guests who think they can fool Disney by sneaking in on foot, WDW should build an electrified fence, preferably with a very deep moat stocked with man eating alligators.
Of course as there is a sign on the Reams Road side allowing basically anyone to enter, (or if they get prior permission from nytimez) guests are free to enter and roam around as they please.

Settle down, lad.

 

[pilferk]

Wow...I thought this was put to bed already.

Yes, the signs conflict - sort of. Perhaps coming from Reams Rd. is OK, but coming from the Contemporary is not. It's a one-way thing.

Regardless, it is what it is.

I do have trouble with the assumption that guests qualify as "authorized vehicles" as guests would have no idea if they are authorized or not.

If you are given permission to ENTER...does it not logically follow that you would also be "authorized" to leave? Short of them revoking, specifically, that authorization?

 

[doconeill]

If you are given permission to ENTER...does it not logically follow that you would also be "authorized" to leave? Short of them revoking, specifically, that authorization?

Don't recall any signs saying you can't leave

 

[pilferk]

Don't recall any signs saying you can't leave

Then we agree..if you come IN via that road, since you're invited to do so...you're authorized to LEAVE via that road.

Or we don't....and we'll just have to agree we interpret the set up differently.

Short of direct clarification by Disney, though, I think it's a tough sell that people that think exiting the way you came in isn't "breaking the rules", and is allowed (and accounted for by the "authorization" to enter) are categorically wrong.

 

[doconeill]

Then we agree..if you come IN via that road, since you're invited to do so...you're authorized to LEAVE via that road.

Or we don't....and we'll just have to agree we interpret the set up differently.

Short of direct clarification by Disney, though, I think it's a tough sell that people that think exiting the way you came in isn't "breaking the rules", and is allowed (and accounted for by the "authorization" to enter) are categorically wrong.

Well, you can exit via that road...if you can get back there.

I agree it's a tough sell, and I think it is just to deter accidental incursions backstage more than anything else.

 

[CR Resort Fan 4 Life]

I agree it's a tough sell, and I think it is just to deter accidental incursions backstage more than anything else.

I know when driving past the Contemporary farther down that road is an area where WDW keeps their Christmas decorations and etc when they are not being used. Now unless I am wrong don't they give tours of that location and if so that means non Cast Members going there, so how else are those people supposed to get there for that tour if I am correct that one takes place.

 

[doconeill]

I know when driving past the Contemporary farther down that road is an area where WDW keeps their Christmas decorations and etc when they are not being used. Now unless I am wrong don't they give tours of that location and if so that means non Cast Members going there, so how else are those people supposed to get there for that tour if I am correct that one takes place.

I don't believe the guests go there on tours unattended. They are brought there after typically meeting at a park via Disney transportation.

 

[CR Resort Fan 4 Life]

I don't believe the guests go there on tours unattended. They are brought there after typically meeting at a park via Disney transportation.

But my point is that WDW doesn't mind having regular guests going over there for tours and why I think some people on this thread have gone overboard thinking because that part of the road is backstage it needs to be kept secret if your not a Cast Member.

 

[doconeill]

But my point is that WDW doesn't mind having regular guests going over there for tours and why I think some people on this thread have gone overboard thinking because that part of the road is backstage it needs to be kept secret if your not a Cast Member.

Well, it CAN be argued that those guests are escorted backstage, and they do preface most if not all backstage tours that it can "break the magic" - often why there are age restrictions as well.

Like I said, it is likely to prevent "accidental" incursions more than anything.

 

[CR Resort Fan 4 Life]

Like I said, it is likely to prevent "accidental" incursions more than anything.

Well whenever my family and I have driven past the Contemporary and behind the Magic Kingdom going to the Winter Garden Shopping Village we would put the address in of a store there on our navigation system so we don't a wrong turn once on Reams Road. Anyway if these roads are meant to be private or not accessed by guests the way some have claimed on here even though that's been proven false, wouldn't the navigation system say we can't access that road due to it being private or restricted?

 

[DCTooTall]

Well whenever my family and I have driven past the Contemporary and behind the Magic Kingdom going to the Winter Garden Shopping Village we would put the address in of a store there on our navigation system so we don't a wrong turn once on Reams Road. Anyway if these roads are meant to be private or not accessed by guests the way some have claimed on here even though that's been proven false, wouldn't the navigation system say we can't access that road due to it being private or restricted?

I wouldn't use a navigation system as a sign of if a road should be accessed. There are too many stories of people blindly following their GPS Nav system into the middle of a dessert or onto a gravel road on the side of a mountain. Depending on the system, a lot of times they may have a road listed, but it neglects to mention or consider the proper use or design of the road.


(I'm not going to pick a side on this whole debate, I just wanted to chime in that using a nav system's maps is not the most bulletproof argument either way.)