Will DVC count as a "Deluxe Resort" for extended park hours

[Sandisw]

No, I agree with what you are saying. I just worded my post incorrectly. What I am surprised about is the percentage of DVC owners supporting this decision vs. the ones not supporting it. In the other thread they are overwhelmingly against this move, even if it benefits them. In this thread the exact opposite is true. One would assume that DVC support/non-support would be consistent across threads.

i think it is like any decision. Some I like some I don’t but go with the flow and adjust.

We also have no idea if this is a test to see how some implications of tiered benefits will play out as a business model going forward.

So this thread is 99% of DVC owners where the other thread is not and the number of DVC is where posting there may be very small to the overall ownership.

For example, if many of us here started also posting there to it would change that view of DVC!

 

[limace]

I was listening to a Disney history podcast this morning and the podcaster told this story that Duck Nunis used to tell: Recalling a visit to Disneyland by evangelist Billy Graham, Nunis says: "{Graham} was just overwhelmed. He stopped and said, 'Gee, Walt, what a fantastic world! What a marvelous world of fantasy!'

"Walt looked at Billy and said, 'Billy, look around you. Look at all the people. All nationalities. All languages. All smiling. All having fun together.' He said. 'Billy, this is the real world. The fantasy is outside.' "

The historian went on to say that this was Walt saying that once you were in the gates of Disneyland, who you were-race and financial status and outside troubles-should cease to matter. Now look-I know this was never completely true. You’ve always been able to upgrade your experience with money-more ride tickets back in the day, better meal-and racism sure isn’t left outside the gates. And I’ve benefited from Maxpass at DL and Exoress Pass from Deluxe hotels at Universal. But still. Every step in this direction makes me a little sad-it’s a step away from that shared experience. And you know Disney doesn’t ever walk back decisions that make more money.

 

[TinkB278]

No, I agree with what you are saying. I just worded my post incorrectly. What I am surprised about is the percentage of DVC owners supporting this decision vs. the ones not supporting it. In the other thread they are overwhelmingly against this move, even if it benefits them. In this thread the exact opposite is true. One would assume that DVC support/non-support would be consistent across threads.

I think I’m confused on why people who benefit from this wouldn’t support it.

 

[DisneyStarWisher]

I think I’m confused on why people who benefit from this wouldn’t support it.

Because sometimes things that are unethical benefit people. That doesn't mean everyone supports those things that are unethical. Stealing would benefit me, but that doesn't mean I will do it.

 

[TinkB278]

Because sometimes things that are unethical benefit people. That doesn't mean everyone supports those things that are unethical. Stealing would benefit me, but that doesn't mean I will do it.

But does this fall under the category of “unethical”? To me, it just seems like a perk for spending more money. I hardly see how this falls into the same category as stealing.

Everyone wants perks for DVC members but now that they have added one, people are saying that being happy about it is akin to being a thief? I just don’t get it.

 

[CraigInPA]

Here's a simple example: I was traveling to the Four Seasons in DC for a conference several years ago. As the bellman was opening the door to my Lyft, he welcomed me by name. I still am not 100% sure how they pulled that off--I suspect his colleague checked the name tag on my luggage as he was pulling it out of the trunk--but it appeared completely effortless. Even with ME and the ability to know for sure who is getting off the bus with at least 30 minutes notice, the Cast is looking at a tablet to try to figure out who you are as you walk up.

There was a time when a CM welcomed DVC members as they stepped off the bus. I was pretty surprised when a young CM walked up to us and welcomed us by name. I suspect the trick there was that they had a list of everyone on the bus, and when we got off at BC/BCV we may have been the only DVC people on that bus. Still, it was surprising, unexpected, and hinted of a more upscale resort. Of course, they did away with this by our next trip! Just like Disney to downgrade the experience to save a few dollars!

 

[Brian Noble]

No, I agree with what you are saying. I just worded my post incorrectly. What I am surprised about is the percentage of DVC owners supporting this decision vs. the ones not supporting it. In the other thread they are overwhelmingly against this move, even if it benefits them. In this thread the exact opposite is true. One would assume that DVC support/non-support would be consistent across threads.

I'm still not surprised. DVC owners have already paid the premium and are locked in to Deluxe/DVC properties. They won't have to continue to make a decision if Deluxe is "worth it."

Most folks doing cash rentals are probably not in the I-stay-Deluxe-or-I-won't-go camp. Even if they are, they probably understand that this perk will provide price support for the nightly rate at Deluxe resorts, and the discounting off rack rate that we've come to expect (pretty much 25% any time of year) might become a little less common.

 

[Brian Noble]

There was a time when a CM welcomed DVC members as they stepped off the bus. I was pretty surprised when a young CM walked up to us and welcomed us by name.

I think this still happens--I recall it from the last time I took ME in early '19---but they always seem to be fumbling with their tablets trying to figure out who is who; it is far from effortless. I think you just managed to draw a better-than-average CM.

And it only happens for guests on ME. If you drive up, you are just "Welcome Home."

 

[Brian Noble]

Because sometimes things that are unethical benefit people. That doesn't mean everyone supports those things that are unethical. Stealing would benefit me, but that doesn't mean I will do it.

I am not sure how one compares "taking something that doesn't belong to me" with "getting more theme park access by paying more for my hotel room."

 

[DisneyStarWisher]

But does this fall under the category of “unethical”? To me, it just seems like a perk for spending more money. I hardly see how this falls into the same category as stealing.

Everyone wants perks for DVC members but now that they have added one, people are saying that being happy about it is akin to being a thief? I just don’t get it.

I am not sure how one compares "taking something that doesn't belong to me" with "getting more theme park access by paying more for my hotel room."

Stealing was just an example of something unethical. I didn’t say that the policy was an example of stealing. My point is that people may be upset because they feel that it isn’t the right thing to do even if it benefits them. There are LOTS of things that benefit people but that are ethically wrong. That was just one example. For me, I don’t know if I feel that it is wrong but I do feel funny about it. That may be enough for me not to participate. I’m still trying to decide. TinkB278 asked why people would be upset if it benefits them. I was telling a reason why I think it might be possible for some to be upset.

 

[CarolynFH]

As my husband says, do we think it's unfair/unethical that the people flying first class get on and off the plane first, get free drinks, have larger seats and more leg room than those of us in economy? This is not a DVC perk, it's a perk for staying in a Disney Deluxe resort, and when he and I come in November we will not be eligible despite our DVC member card, because we're staying off site.

 

[fumanchu2488]

Stealing was just an example of something unethical. I didn’t say that the policy was an example of stealing. My point is that people may be upset because they feel that it isn’t the right thing to do even if it benefits them. There are LOTS of things that benefit people but that are ethically wrong. That was just one example. For me, I don’t know if I feel that it is wrong but I do feel funny about it. That may be enough for me not to participate. I’m still trying to decide. TinkB278 asked why people would be upset if it benefits them. I was telling a reason why I think it might be possible for some to be upset.

You aren’t saying what they are doing is stealing, but you are inferring that this policy is unethical. Do you think giving people who pay more money extra benefits is unethical?

 

[Brian Noble]

I think there is an interesting discussion about the ethical implications of various societal mechanisms that encourage/discourage the concentration of wealth in fewer hands, and I have some pretty strong opinions about that. But, this is not the place to share them.

 

[DisneyStarWisher]

As my husband says, do we think it's unfair/unethical that the people flying first class get on and off the plane first, get free drinks, have larger seats and more leg room than those of us in economy? This is not a DVC perk, it's a perk for staying in a Disney Deluxe resort, and when he and I come in November we will not be eligible despite our DVC member card, because we're staying off site.

I don't think that is unethical because those are the benefits for paying for first class. The benefits for paying for a deluxe resort should be the nicer room and ambiance of the resort. I don't think it should include extra park hours that others can't enjoy. I actually think it would be better if it was a DVC perk. When we bought into DVC, we knew there might be perks offered related to the parks. DVC isn't part of a higher "class." It's just a membership.

You aren’t saying what they are doing is stealing, but you are inferring that this policy is unethical. Do you think giving people who pay more money extra benefits is unethical?

To me, it does border on being unethical. Walt wanted EVERYONE to enjoy the parks, no matter how much money they were paying for their room. To me, the room and the park are two different things. It does bother me a little that a park will be open but this person and this person can't come in because they didn't pay for a nicer room. The nicer room should be the only benefit if paying deluxe prices.

 

[fumanchu2488]

To me, it does border on being unethical. Walt wanted EVERYONE to enjoy the parks, no matter how much money they were paying for their room. To me, the room and the park are two different things. It does bother me a little that a park will be open but this person and this person can't come in because they didn't pay for a nicer room. The nicer room should be the only benefit if paying deluxe prices.

Walt was never alive when Disney owned a hotel so there was never a link between the two for him. Also, his pricing model for Disneyland was always a pay to play so he clearly understood that people were going to get a better experience by paying more money.

I personally have no issue linking hotels and parks and granting more benefits to people who choose to spend their money at Disney property at their more expensive hotels. I don’t see it too much different than offering EMH for on site guests vs off site.

 

[TexasChick123]

We have never gone on a VIP tour. When I looked at the price, I just couldn’t stomach it. We choose to either save that money or spend it elsewhere. The point of this is that people pay money to get better experiences. Universal has included Express passes for years with their top 3 hotels. This is something I am willing to pay for, so whenever we go to Universal, we pay for the more expensive hotels. If I had a penny for everything I used to get for free that I now have to pay for, I’d have enough for my kids’ college tuition. Disney is a business. Their deluxe hotels haven’t been filling at rack rates for some years. They’ve had to offer discounts or rent out rooms for conferences at discounted rates for several years. I see this as them shifting their focus to compete with the Four Seasons and the like by offering more perks without the renovations or increase in services at those hotels. Staying in a hotel like the Four Seasons is really mostly about the experience. Some of the rooms, while very nice, aren’t always the nicest around. It’s the amenities, perks, service, etc that distinguish those hotels from others.

 

[Brian Noble]

Walt wanted EVERYONE to enjoy the parks

You might be interested in the excellent Gabler biography of Walt; it points out (among other things) that the "ol' Uncle Walt" image was a persona.

What's more, the original Disneyland pricing model was $1 for admission, plus a fee for every attraction you wanted to ride. Ticket books didn't come with admission until several months after the park opened, and even then they were limited.

If you wanted to ride more, you had to pay more, and that was true from the very beginning. The idea of pay-one-price/ride-all-you-want admission didn't come around until WDW had been open for almost ten years.

 

[Sandisw]

I don't think that is unethical because those are the benefits for paying for first class. The benefits for paying for a deluxe resort should be the nicer room and ambiance of the resort. I don't think it should include extra park hours that others can't enjoy. I actually think it would be better if it was a DVC perk. When we bought into DVC, we knew there might be perks offered related to the parks. DVC isn't part of a higher "class." It's just a membership.

To me, it does border on being unethical. Walt wanted EVERYONE to enjoy the parks, no matter how much money they were paying for their room. To me, the room and the park are two different things. It does bother me a little that a park will be open but this person and this person can't come in because they didn't pay for a nicer room. The nicer room should be the only benefit if paying deluxe prices.

Can't say that I agree this in an unethical decision. They are a business and while some may feel that the perks of staying deluxe are only the resort itself, Disney has decided that the perks that come with a deluxe hotel room include extra park hours. I don't really see it any different than the first class example. First class passengers also get free baggage so that is above and beyond the experience of the flight, isn't it.

Not all decisions they make will sit well with all guests and they know that. So, if they find that this one works against them, it will change. If it doesn't, then we will see it continue. I mean the resorts are not equal now. Look at the food options. The values and moderates have much better QS places than the deluxe do. The reason? Because it was felt that those guests would want more variety and less expensive options so food courts were built but at deluxe resorts, it was more about TS.

 

[New Mouse]

You might be interested in the excellent Gabler biography of Walt; it points out (among other things) that the "ol' Uncle Walt" image was a persona.

What's more, the original Disneyland pricing model was $1 for admission, plus a fee for every attraction you wanted to ride. Ticket books didn't come with admission until several months after the park opened, and even then they were limited.

If you wanted to ride more, you had to pay more, and that was true from the very beginning. The idea of pay-one-price/ride-all-you-want admission didn't come around until WDW had been open for almost ten years.

Prices were mlre reasonable then.

 

[DisneyStarWisher]

You might be interested in the excellent Gabler biography of Walt; it points out (among other things) that the "ol' Uncle Walt" image was a persona.

What's more, the original Disneyland pricing model was $1 for admission, plus a fee for every attraction you wanted to ride. Ticket books didn't come with admission until several months after the park opened, and even then they were limited.

If you wanted to ride more, you had to pay more, and that was true from the very beginning. The idea of pay-one-price/ride-all-you-want admission didn't come around until WDW had been open for almost ten years.

Sounds like a good read. I'll check it out. I think what may bother me about it is the fact that someone who is staying at a cheaper resort can't even come into the park at all when it is open for the more "elite." The rides aren't the only reason people go into a park. And won't this cause the park to close early in order for the higher-paying customers to have their time? Park time will be taken away from the lower-paying customer. Honestly, I'm not super upset about this, but I don't feel great about it. I am just explaining why I think some people may be upset about it. Maybe more who are upset can chime in, so we can understand all perspectives.